Evaluation of image accessibility for visually impaired users

Authors

  • Tahani Alahmadi School of information and communication technology, Griffith University School of computer and communication science, Princess Nora University
  • Steve Drew Tasmanian Institute for Learning and Teaching/ University of Tasmania School of information and communication technology, Griffith University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17411/jacces.v8i2.167

Keywords:

Image accessibility, descriptive text, alt text, visually impaired, human evaluation, automated tool evaluation

Abstract

The accessibility of website images is influenced by the availability and accuracy of descriptive text and its compatibility with image complexity and purpose. Image accessibility evaluation cannot be fully affected through applying one method, and can be enhanced by inclusion of processes that consider the quality of image descriptive text. The evaluation of descriptive text quality may initially involve human evaluation, then use an automated evaluation tool to provide a counterpoint. In this paper, an analysis is presented of a dataset of 120 complex and informative images found on universities’ web-based systems. This is supplemented with a detailed analysis of HTML image attributes and elements. Human and automated analysis of content are combined and the integration of information to inform the evaluation outcome. Our analysis illustrates a lack of accurate usage of HTML image attributes and elements, such as alt and longdesc.  The findings provide insight for the improvement of image accessibility by applying multi-evaluation methods and auto generator descriptive text. This paper will be of interest to web accessibility developers and researchers.

References

AChecker Adaptive Technology Resource Centre. (2017, July 31). Web Accessibility Checker. Retrived from http://www.achecker.ca/checker/index.php

Alahmadi, T., & Drew, S. (2016). An evaluation of the accessibility of top-ranking university websites: Accessibility rates from 2005 to 2015. Paper presented at the DEANZ Biennial Conference.

Alahmadi, T., & Drew, S. (2017a). Subjective Evaluation of Website Accessibility and Usability: A Survey for People with Sensory Disabilities. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 14th Web for All Conference on The Future of Accessible Work.

Alahmadi, T., & Drew, S. (2017b). Accessibility evaluation of top-ranking university websites in world, Oceania, and Arab categories for home, admission, and course description webpages. Journal of Open, Flexible and Distance Learning, 21(1), 7.

Alahmadi, T. (2017c). A multi-method evaluation of university website accessibility: Foregrounding user-centred design, mining source code and using a quantitative metric. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 14th Web for All Conference on The Future of Accessible Work.

Bailey, C., Pearson, E., & Gkatzidou, V. (2014). Measuring and comparing the reliability of the structured walkthrough evaluation method with novices and experts. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 11th Web for All Conference.

Biswas, P., Duarte, C., Langdon, P., Almeida, L., & Jung, C. (2013). A multimodal end-2-end approach to accessible computing: Springer.

Reichardt, M. (2017). Ein Forschungslabor für die Informationswissenschaft: Anforderungsanalyse. Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Retrieved from http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bundesrecht/bitv_2_0/gesamt.pdf, 25.7.2017

Brajnik, G. (2008). Beyond conformance: the role of accessibility evaluation methods. Paper presented at the International Conference on Web Information Systems Engineering.

Brajnik, G., & Lomuscio, R. (2007). SAMBA: a semi-automatic method for measuring barriers of accessibility. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 9th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility.

Brajnik, G., Yesilada, Y.,

& Harper, S. (2010). Testability and validity of WCAG 2.0: the expertise effect. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 12th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility.

Bühler, C., Heck, H., Perlick, O., Nietzio, A., & Ulltveit-Moe, N. (2006). Interpreting results from large scale automatic evaluation of web accessibility. Paper presented at the International Conference on Computers for Handicapped Persons.

Cleary, J. F., & Maurer, M. A. (2017). TEMPORARY REMOVAL: Pain and Policy Studies Group: Two decades of working to address regulatory barriers to improve opioid availability and accessibility around the world. Journal of pain and symptom management.

Connor, J. O. (2012). Pro HTML5 accessibility: Building an inclusive web (1st ed.). Berkeley, CA;New York;: Apress.

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications

Crow, K. L. (2008). Four types of disabilities: Their impact on online learning. TechTrends, 52(1), 51-55.

Dobrota, M., Bulajic, M., Bornmann, L., & Jeremic, V. (2016). A new approach to the QS university ranking using the composite I‐distance indicator: Uncertainty and sensitivity analyses. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(1), 200-211.

Fichten, C., Jorgensen, S., Havel, A., Barile, M., Landry, M.-E., Fiset, D., & Amsel, R. (2006). Executive Summary-College Students with Disabilities: Their Future and Success. In: Final report presented to FQRSC (Fonds de recherche sur la société et la culture). Montréal: Adaptech Research Network, Dawson College. ERIC (Education Resources Information Center)(ED491585). Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED491585.pdf

Gajos, K. Z. (2014). Making the web more inclusive with adaptive user interfaces. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGCHI symposium on Engineering interactive computing systems.

Gómez-Martínez, E., Linaje, M., Sánchez-Figueroa, F., Iglesias-Pérez, A., Preciado, J. C., González-Cabero, R., & Merseguer, J. (2015). A semantic approach for designing Assistive Software Recommender systems. Journal of Systems and Software, 104, 166-178.

Kulkarni, G., Premraj, V., Ordonez, V., Dhar, S., Li, S., Choi, Y., . . . Berg, T. L. (2013). Babytalk: Understanding and generating simple image descriptions. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 35(12), 2891-2903.

Masri, F., & Luján-Mora, S. (2011). A combined agile methodology for the evaluation of web accessibility. Paper presented at the IADIS International Conference Interfaces and Human Computer Interaction (IHCI 2011).

Moreno, G., Castillo, V., Williams, K., & Menéndez, N. (2015). Characterization of software development companies in Panama from Usability and Accessibility approach. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the XVI International Conference on Human Computer Interaction.

Nietzio, A., Strobbe, C., & Velleman, E. (2008). The unified Web evaluation methodology (UWEM) 1.2 for WCAG 1.0. Paper presented at the International Conference on Computers for Handicapped Persons.

Paciello, M. G. (2000). Web accessibility for people with disabilities: CMP books.

Parliament, I. (2004). Stanca Act, Law no. 4, January 9, 2004: Provisions to support the access to information technologies for the disabled. Gazzetta Ufficiale, 13, 17.

Parmanto, B., & Zeng, X. (2005). Metric for web accessibility evaluation. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 56(13), 1394-1404.

Pipino, L. L., Lee, Y. W., & Wang, R. Y. (2002). Data quality assessment. Communications of the ACM, 45(4), 211-218.

Rice, W. (2012). Blackboard essentials for teachers: Packt Publishing Ltd. Retrieved from http://www.ebrary.com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au

Rodriguez‐Ascaso, A., Boticario, J. G., Finat, C., & Petrie, H. (2017). Setting accessibility preferences about learning objects within adaptive elearning systems: User experience and organizational aspects. Expert Systems, 34(4).

Splendiani, B., & Ribera, M. (2014). How to textually describe images in medical academic publications. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the XV International Conference on Human Computer Interaction.

Stephanidis, C., Paramythis, A., Sfyrakis, M., Stergiou, A., Maou, N., Leventis, A., . . . Karagiannidis, C. (1998). Adaptable and adaptive user interfaces for disabled users in the AVANTI project. Paper presented at the International Conference on Intelligence in Services and Networks.

Sun, Y. T., Vu, K.-P. L., & Strybel, T. Z. (2017). A validation test of an accessibility evaluation method. Paper presented at the International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics.

U.S. Department of Justice. (2016, November 25). Section 508 self- evaluation. Agency Directions. USDOJ. Retrieved from http://www.justice.gov/crt/section-508-self-evaluation

Vázquez, S. R. (2015). Unlocking the potential of web localizers as contributors to image accessibility: what do evaluation tools have to offer? Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 12th Web for All Conference.

Velasco, C. A., Denev, D., Stegemann, D., & Mohamad, Y. (2008). A web compliance engineering framework to support the development of accessible rich internet applications. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2008 international cross-disciplinary conference on Web accessibility (W4A).

Watanabe, W. M., Fortes, R. P., & Dias, A. L. (2017). Acceptance tests for validating ARIA requirements in widgets. Universal Access in the Information Society, 16(1), 3-27.

Wu, S., Wieland, J., Farivar, O., & Schiller, J. (2017). Automatic Alt-text: Computer-generated Image Descriptions for Blind Users on a Social Network Service. Paper presented at the CSCW.

World Health Organization. (2017, April 1). World Health Statistics 2010. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/gho/publications/world_health_statistics/en/

W3C Images Concepts. (2017, July 15). W3C: Web Accessibility Tutorials. Retrieved from https://www.w3.org/WAI/tutorials/images/

W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. (2017, July 10). Introduction to Understanding WCAG 2.0. Retrieved from https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/intro.html#introduction-fourprincs-head

Yesilada, Y., Brajnik, G., & Harper, S. (2009). How much does expertise matter?: a barrier walkthrough study with experts and non-experts. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 11th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility

Downloads

Published

2018-11-30

How to Cite

Alahmadi, T., & Drew, S. (2018). Evaluation of image accessibility for visually impaired users. Journal of Accessibility and Design for All, 8(2), 125–160. https://doi.org/10.17411/jacces.v8i2.167

Issue

Vol. 8 No. 2 (2018): Journal of Accessibility and Design for All

Section

Engineering

License

Authors who publish with Journal of Accessibility and Design for All agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share or adapt the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. Use of the work for commercial purposes are not allowed.
  2. Authors are able to publish the journal's published version of the work in other media  (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as far as they inform the Journal of Accessibility and Design for All of that fact. When publishing their work in other sources, authors must mention the name of the Journal of Accessibility and Design for All, its ISSN, the number and issue in which the article was published and a link to the main page of the Journal of Accessibility and Design for All. Optionally, they can also include a link to the article published in the Journal of Accessibility and Design for All.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website), as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.