Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The extent of mobile accessibility coverage in WCAG 2.1: sufficiency of success criteria and appropriateness of relevant conformance levels pertaining to accessibility problems encountered by users who are visually impaired

  • Long Paper
  • Published:
Universal Access in the Information Society Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 16 March 2021

This article has been updated

Abstract

People who are blind or visually impaired exhibit different interaction and access needs on mobile touchscreen devices. This is rooted in the reliance on non-visual access for using electronic devices. In comparison to regular computers, non-visual access to mobile touchscreen devices poses more challenges for reasons related to the lack of physical buttons, the limited size of touchscreens, and the reliance on gesture-based interaction. This paper aims at shedding light on the persistent accessibility-related problems that users who are blind or visually impaired are likely to encounter while interacting with mobile touchscreen devices, and whether or not these problems are sufficiently covered in the recent release of Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 2.1). The study presented in this paper involved a total of 16 participants with visual impairment cases ranging from moderate vision loss to legal blindness. The results revealed a multitude of critical accessibility problems that are still being overlooked while developing mobile Apps and websites. After compiling all problems, a total of 34 major problems were identified. These problems were then classified into categories with identified nature, severity, and affected demographic. While many of these problems are mapped to existing accessibility guidelines delivered in WCAG 2.1, some problems either lack relevant success criteria in WCAG 2.1 or have insufficient conformance levels in WCAG 2.1. The paper concludes that despite the existence of different mobile-oriented guidelines in WCAG 2.1, there is still an obvious lack of adherence to these guidelines in mainstream mobile content. Moreover, the findings suggest there is room for improvement in WCAG 2.1 to cover more of the problems that users who are blind or visually impaired encounter on mobile touchscreen devices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Change history

References

  1. Griffin-Shirley, N., Banda, D.R., Ajuwon, P.M., Cheon, J., Lee, J., Park, H.R., Lyngdoh, S.N.: A survey on the use of mobile applications for people who are visually impaired. J. Vis. Impairment Blindness 111(4), 307–323 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Watanabe, T., Yamaguchi, T., Minatani, K.: Advantages and drawbacks of smartphones and tablets for visually impaired people—analysis of ICT user survey results. IEICE Trans. Inf. Syst. 98(4), 922–929 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Quoracreative. (2020). 101 Mobile Marketing Statistics And Trends For 2020. https://quoracreative.com/article/mobile-marketing-statistics

  4. Statista. (2020). Mobile percentage of website traffic 2020. https://www.statista.com/statistics/277125/share-of-website-traffic-coming-from-mobile-devices/

  5. Hakobyan, L., Lumsden, J., O’Sullivan, D., Bartlett, H.: Mobile assistive technologies for the visually impaired. Surv. Ophthalmol. 58(6), 513–528 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Akkara, J.D., Kuriakose, A.: Smartphone apps for visually impaired persons. Kerala J. Ophthalmol. 31(3), 242 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs Disability. (2006). The UN Convention on the rights of persons with Disabilities. UN. https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities-2.html

  8. Takagi, H., Asakawa, C.: New challenges in web accessibility. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 16(1), 1–2 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). (2019). Introduction to Web Accessibility, Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI). W3C. https://www.w3.org/WAI/fundamentals/accessibility-intro/

  10. The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). (2019). Mobile Accessibility at W3C. W3C. https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/mobile/

  11. United Nations (UN). (2006). Article 9- Accessibility, United Nations Enable. UN. https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities/article-9-accessibility.html

  12. Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act (1998). 29 U.S.C. § 794d

  13. European Commission (EC). (2016). Directive (EU) 2016/2102 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2016 on the Accessibility of Public Sector Websites and Mobile Applications of Public Sector Bodies. EC. https://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2016/2102/oj

  14. Ballantyne, M., Jha, A., Jacobsen, A., Hawker, J. S., El-Glaly, Y. N. (2018). Study of accessibility guidelines of mobile applications. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia (pp. 305–315).

  15. Mi, N., Cavuoto, L.A., Benson, K., Smith-Jackson, T., Nussbaum, M.A.: A heuristic checklist for an accessible smartphone interface design. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 13(4), 351–365 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kane, S. K., Wobbrock, J. O., Ladner, R. E. (2011). Usable gestures for blind people: understanding preference and performance. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 413–422).

  17. The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). (2018). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1. W3C. https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/

  18. Apple. (2020). Accessibility - Apple Developer. https://developer.apple.com/accessibility/

  19. Google. (2020). Accessibility - Material Design. https://material.io/design/usability/accessibility.html#understanding-accessibility

  20. World Health Organization (WHO). (2019). World report on vision. WHO. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/world-report-on-vision

  21. Irvine, D., Zemke, A., Pusateri, G., Gerlach, L., Chun, R., Jay, W.M.: Tablet and smartphone accessibility features in the low vision rehabilitation. Neuro-ophthalmology 38(2), 53–59 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Martiniello, N., Eisenbarth, W., Lehane, C., Johnson, A., Wittich, W. (2019). Exploring the use of smartphones and tablets among people with visual impairments: Are mainstream devices replacing the use of traditional visual aids?. Assistive Technol., pp. 1–12.

  23. Sarsenbayeva, Z. (2018). Situational Impairments during Mobile Interaction. In: Proceedings of the 2018 ACM International Joint Conference and 2018 International Symposium on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing and Wearable Computers (pp. 498–503).

  24. The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). (2020). World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). W3C. https://www.w3.org/

  25. Abou-Zahra, S., Brewer, J., Henry, S. L. (2013). Essential components of mobile web accessibility. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility (pp. 1–4).

  26. Billi, M., Burzagli, L., Catarci, T., Santucci, G., Bertini, E., Gabbanini, F., Palchetti, E.: A unified methodology for the evaluation of accessibility and usability of mobile applications. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 9(4), 337–356 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lopes, R., Bandeira, R., Carriço, L., Van Isacker, K. (2010). Towards mobile web accessibility: vision and challenges. In: Proceedings of the first International ÆGIS Conference (pp. 151–158).

  28. Clegg-Vinell, R., Bailey, C., Gkatzidou, V. (2014). Investigating the appropriateness and relevance of mobile web accessibility guidelines. In: Proceedings of the 11th Web for All Conference (pp. 1–4).

  29. Patch, K., Spellman, J., & Wahlbin, K. (2015). Mobile accessibility: How WCAG 2.0 and other W3C/WAI guidelines apply to mobile. W3C First Public Working Draft, 26.

  30. Power, C., Freire, A., Petrie, H., Swallow, D. (2012). Guidelines are only half of the story: accessibility problems encountered by blind users on the web. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 433–442).

  31. Carvalho, M. C. N., Dias, F. S., Reis, A. G. S., Freire, A. P. (2018). Accessibility and usability problems encountered on websites and applications in mobile devices by blind and normal-vision users. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM symposium on applied computing (pp. 2022–2029).

  32. World Wide Web Consortium. (2009). Mobile Web Initiative. W3C. https://www.w3.org/Mobile/

  33. Rabin, J., McCathieNevile, C. (2008). Mobile web best practices 1.0 basic guidelines. W3C Recommendation 29 July 2008.

  34. The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). (2019). Mobile Accessibility Guidelines - Accessibility For Products. BBC. https://www.bbc.co.uk/accessibility/forproducts/guides/mobile/

  35. Silva, C., Eler, M. M., Fraser, G. (2018). A survey on the tool support for the automatic evaluation of mobile accessibility. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Software Development and Technologies for Enhancing Accessibility and Fighting Info-exclusion (pp. 286–293).

  36. Damaceno, R.J.P., Braga, J.C., Mena-Chalco, J.P.: Mobile device accessibility for the visually impaired: problems mapping and recommendations. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 17(2), 421–435 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Smaradottir, B., Håland, J., Martinez, S.: Accessibility of mobile devices for visually impaired users: an evaluation of the screen-reader VoiceOver. Stud. Health Technol. Inf. 245, 1381 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Luthra, V., Ghosh, S. (2015). Understanding, evaluating and analyzing touch screen gestures for visually impaired users in mobile environment. In: International Conference on Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 25–36). Springer, Cham.

  39. Buzzi, M.C., Buzzi, M., Leporini, B., Trujillo, A.: Analyzing visually impaired people’s touch gestures on smartphones. Multimedia Tools Appl. 76(4), 5141–5169 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Serra, L.C., Carvalho, L.P., Ferreira, L.P., Vaz, J.B.S., Freire, A.P.: Accessibility evaluation of e-government mobile applications in Brazil. Proc. Comp. Sci. 67, 348–357 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Ghidini, E., Almeida, W. D., Manssour, I. H., & Silveira, M. S. (2016, January). Developing apps for visually impaired people: Lessons learned from practice. In: 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) (pp. 5691–5700). IEEE, New York

  42. AppleVis. (2010). AppleVis. https://www.applevis.com/

  43. TeamViewer. (2005). TeamViewer - The Remote Connectivity Software. http://www.teamviewer.com/en/

  44. Van Someren, M.W., Barnard, Y.F., Sandberg, J.A.C.: The think aloud method: a practical approach to modelling cognitive. AcademicPress, London (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Jadán-Guerrero, J., Guevara, C., Sanchez-Gordon, S., Calle-Jimenez, T., Lara-Alvarez, P., Medina, A., Nunes, I. L. (2019). Accessibility Assessment in Mobile Applications for Android. In: Advances in Human Factors and Systems Interaction: Proceedings of the AHFE 2019 International Conference on Human Factors and Systems Interaction, July 24–28, 2019, Washington DC, USA (Vol. 959, p. 279). Springer, Cham.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, Tafila Technical University, Tafila, 66110, Jordan

    Nancy Alajarmeh

Authors
  1. Nancy Alajarmeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nancy Alajarmeh.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix A: The tasks participants were required to perform during testing sessions

Appendix A: The tasks participants were required to perform during testing sessions

The software used in the study combined two mobile Apps and two websites. The mobile Apps used in the study are: (1) Telegram App (i.e., a communication App) and (2) Macy’s App (i.e., online shopping App) in both iOS and Android. The websites used are: www.accuweather.com (i.e., an international weather forecasting website) and www.discogs.com (i.e., the largest online music database in the world). Table 6 below shows the tasks, required from each participant, corresponding each of the aforementioned Apps and websites.

Table 6 Software used in the study and required tasks in each
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Alajarmeh, N. The extent of mobile accessibility coverage in WCAG 2.1: sufficiency of success criteria and appropriateness of relevant conformance levels pertaining to accessibility problems encountered by users who are visually impaired. Univ Access Inf Soc 21, 507–532 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-020-00785-w

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-020-00785-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation