IT Accessibility Review
Volume 1, Number 10
Breaking News
Disney Takes One Compliant Step Forward, Two Invalid Steps Back
By Marjorie Delwarde
Last month, Disney Store UK confounded the web development community when it switched from its web-standards compliant website to a site which fails to meet even the basic accessibility needs of disabled people.
Launched in October last year, the accessible site was created by Conwy-based website developing company, Stuff and Nonsense, in collaboration with brand agency, Akiko, and internet technology and innovation company, Karova, which provided the e-commerce functionality.
Andy Clarke, creative director of Stuff and Nonsense and founder of Karova, says that Disney´s decision was an internal one but had nothing to do with the site´s technical performance.
He recalls that the standards-compliant website was very well received and its performance extremely good. The company, which aims to develop accessible e-commerce solutions, worked with a wide variety of accessibility specialists around the world on the project.
Clarke comments: "The site that we created for Disney was one of the first major accessible and standard based e-commerce sites within the UK. It was the only site within the Disney empire which complied with the W3C guidelines and used a valid XHTML code and CSS for the layout."
He adds: "It was undoubtedly a real example in showing large corporations that accessible and standard-based e-commerce site could be delivered without compromising on brand, design or visual appeal."
Like many, Andrea Kennedy, web accessibility officer at Shaw Trust, the pan-disability charity which also provides web accessibility audits, was puzzled by Disney´s decision.
She says: "I do find it strange that such a large organization as Disney that has such a ´warm and caring´ image would give accessibility a seemingly low priority."
There are three levels of compliance with Web Accessibility Initiative standards; A, AA and AAA. After a quick look at the new site, Kennedy pinpointed a number of accessibility issues that would need to be remedied to achieve even level A compliance.
She explains: "One such problem would be that a non-sighted user using screen-reading software would not be able to use the combo boxes within the search facility. In this instance there were 67 items to choose from but because of the JavaScript activating on a keystroke, a non-sighted user would only be able to listen to the first option."
In addition, there are numerous accessibility problems or issues such as the site being tables-based, using non-valid HTML, and using images to display information without providing a text alternative in the mark-up.
Kennedy says: "It does seem really unusual that somebody will actually take a step backward, especially when everybody at the moment is fighting to get their website as accessible as possible."
In Kennedy´s experience, local authorities are currently at the forefront of web accessibility. Clackmannanshire, which has recently become the first local authority website in the country to achieve accessibility accreditation from The Shaw Trust, is a good example.
Community internet groups, people and organizations that work with people with disabilities, and governmental agencies, are also taking on board the need for accessible websites. Even SMEs show a certain level of awareness, whereas large corporations appear to show laxity.
"As far as large organizations go, they are aware, no doubt, of legal compliances, but there seems to be, in my opinion, a little bit of an attitude that would say there have been no legal cases that have really come out, so I don´t think it´s going to bother me. But I do anticipate a bit of a backlash there," says Kennedy.
She adds: "If Disney requires any information on this subject or would like to discuss any accessibility issues, then the Shaw Trust Web Accreditation team would be more than happy to meet with them."
Of the public reaction to Disney´s decision, Clarke comments: "It does show that when a company goes from a standards-compliant and accessible site to a site which is not compliant and not accessible, they must be aware that they will face at the very least, public ridicule and at worst, legal action."
At the time of publishing, Disney Store UK had yet to respond to Ping Wales´ numerous calls for comment.
Source: http://www.managinginformation.com 9 Dec 2005
The Bread and Butter of Website Accessibility
By Benjamin Briggs
The main reason webmasters fail to make their websites accessible is because they don´t understand the concept of an "accessible website" in the first place.
What accessibility actually means is "can all users get the information they need from my site as quick and as simply as possible?" If you can answer yes to this question, well done, you have an accessible site. If not, you need to know how to make your website accessible, which is what the remainder of this article will look at by pointing out how sites aren´t accessible:
A Splash Screen/intro - If you have a splash screen or intro on your site, its not accessible and I haven´t even seen your actual content yet. It´s not accessible because I can´t get the information I want from your site - splash screens are pointless and above all annoying. 9 times out of 10, if a site has a splash screen, the browser is closed by the user before even looking for the skip intro button.
Use of anything but X/HTML and a CSS to make your website - It has been proven time and time again that the best websites are built on the bread and butter of web design - HTML and a CSS; so why change something that isn´t broken? You may have fancy JavaScript and the like on your website and (hopefully) that looks very pretty, but what if I don´t have the appropriate plug-in to play your pretty applets? That´s right! I can´t get the information I want from your site, thus your site is inaccessible.
Use of "mystery meat" navigation - Does your site have linked images that lead to another page on your site? Do these images have any indication of where the person clicking on this link is going? If you answered no to both of theses questions, your website is inaccessible to everyone. If an image is linked, it should ONLY lead to a bigger version of that image. I would rather have a boring list of text links than loads of images that don´t tell me where I´m going to end up if I click on them.
So in theory, if you don´t have any of the above on your site and your content is something someone else wants to know about, then you should have a good website.
Source:
Webpronews.com
http://www.webpronews.com
Published: 2006-02-07
