RE: Long list of sites that use personalization to meet wcag

I have been reading these emails with interest and am so glad to see Christophe mentioning GPII as we have been working on similar mini projects for example a toolbar that will alter the look of pages if they are accessible and where decluttering is possible.  The problem of injecting code is one of security but with the methods mentioned by Christophe surely there are work arounds to achieve icon / symbol use when required for key elements to aid presentation for those you may struggle with literacy skills and intellectual disabilities.

There are elements of presistence now with the Chrome browser but sadly as we know browsers have their own way of working with user preferences which can also cause problems for those with cognitive disabilities if they are faced with web services appearing in different ways.

Best wishes

Mrs E.A. Draffan
WAIS, ECS , University of Southampton
Mobile +44 (0)7976 289103<>
UK AAATE rep<>

From: Christophe Strobbe []
Sent: 22 June 2017 19:09
Subject: Re: Long list of sites that use personalization to meet wcag

On 22/06/2017 16:32, Alastair Campbell wrote:

> the personalisation aspect comes with a chicken & egg problem.

Sorry, I shouldn’t rely on jargon!

I mean that both ends (the user and the website) need to have implemented it in order for personalisation to work, and neither has motivation to implement it until the other has.

It depends on what you want. In the absence of special software on the user's side, it is possible to add personalisation options to a website and then store the settings in a cookie.
At <><> you can see an excerpt from a video about an online banking simulation that also supports pictograms (not BLISS or another widely used set, but that isn't the point). In this demo, the pictograms appear only on hover, which is not ideal for keyboard-only users, but other options are possible. (The video is in German but has English subtitles.)
A video of a more recent version of this online banking demo can be seen at <><>.
This same demo also shows how the default user interface can be replaced with a simpler user interface: <><>. This doesn't add symbols but is also interesting from a cognitive point of view.

Also interesting from a cognitive point of view is the demo at <><>. Check "doesn't make sense" at the bottom of the page: this will open where you can pick adaptations such as "simplify", "extra words" and "speak".

All of this has a direct or indirect relationship with GPII, which should eventually provide the tools on the user side that would allow things such as persistence of settings etc.

Best regards,

Christophe Strobbe

I think in how it is phrased at the moment means that applying the right meta-data is a pass. However, if the user then activates the customisation the site would fall apart if the developers haven’t also developed the layout to adapt to the icons and changing options.

That is where the real effort comes in: creating and testing the various layout connotations.

That is why I’m interested in examples of added icons and layout changes on real websites.



Christophe Strobbe

Akademischer Mitarbeiter

Responsive Media Experience Research Group (REMEX)

Hochschule der Medien

Nobelstraße 10

70569 Stuttgart

Tel. +49 711 8923 2749

“I drink tea and I know things.”

Falsely attributed to Christophe Lannister.

Received on Thursday, 22 June 2017 18:40:57 UTC