How to Make a Website Accessible

Since I just declared, in the discussion forum, that a non-accessible e-government website is primarily the fault of a lazy webmaster, let me discuss briefly how anyone (librarians included) can make a site accessible to print-disabled persons.

If you would like to look at a few full tutorials, this one is pretty good, and this one is ok, too, although more focused on webmasters from the UK.  

Another great site and a good example of a Javascript- and CSS-free site is Computers for Handicapped Independence Program.  The site, which looks like websites used to before fancy formatting, isn't plain because the authors were not artistic -- this is what a stripped-down site is like; these sites, made without extra formatting, are much easier for computer software to 'read' for the print-impaired.  So long as this is what a site looks like when the fancy stuff is disabled (Javascript and CSS), it's fine for the main site to look pretty.  It is only when site creators forget to make a good foundational site in favor of images and graphics that disabled users cannot access crucial content.

There are many perks to creating an accessible site, including the fact that it is the law for governments and businesses. A disabled-friendly site facilitates clear, concise coding that downloads and moves quickly.  Sites that are accessible tend to use current software, such as Adobe Acrobat 9, which creates a PDF that is reader-accessible.  The latest versions of Flash also provide better accessibility.

Software such as BOBBY (now owned by IBM) and Lynx can be used to test sites for accessibility and are approved for use.  WAVE is another site useful for accessibility checks; put in a web address and it will return your site with accessibility errors marked (I tried http://library.pima.gov and found 20 errors in the homepage, for example). In fact, there are even volunteers who will check your site for disabled access for you (although I suspect WAVE use here).

The WC3, an international group that decides standards for computer- and Internet-related hardware and software, gives the following guidelines for designing an accessible website:

Perceivable

* Provide text alternatives for non-text content.
* Provide captions and alternatives for audio and video content.
* Make content adaptable; and make it available to assistive technologies.
* Use sufficient contrast to make things easy to see and hear.

Operable

* Make all functionality keyboard accessible.
* Give users enough time to read and use content.
* Do not use content that causes seizures.
* Help users navigate and find content.

Understandable

* Make text readable and understandable.
* Make content appear and operate in predictable ways.
* Help users avoid and correct mistakes.

Robust

* Maximize compatibility with current and future technologies.

While this might seem like a daunting list, it really is not more daunting than creating a usable site in the first place.  For example, certain flashing images can induce seizures; if you don't want your users to be ill, limit the flashing and the bright colors.  Put navigation on the left.  Don't make your background black with bright yellow print.  When you post a photo, add a little description so that those with images disabled (i.e., print-impaired) will know the content of the photo.  This is also extremely useful for search engines, as it creates metadata for cataloging of images (and, as librarians, we should all be very good at tagging and creating metadata). 

The article by Rubaii-Barrett and Wise on Disability Access and E-Government was an interesting one, and they asked a lot of interesting questions, but they did not spend much time on the one that, in my opinion, is most pertinent: who's going to fire those webmasters who decided not to follow the law?