理解网页可访问性及其驱动因素

Y. Yeşilada, G. Brajnik, Markel Vigo, S. Harper
{"title":"理解网页可访问性及其驱动因素","authors":"Y. Yeşilada, G. Brajnik, Markel Vigo, S. Harper","doi":"10.1145/2207016.2207027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Access is what the web is 'about', it is the motivation behind its creation, and it is the rationale behind HTML. The desire to provide all users at CERN with the ability to access all documents was Tim Berners-Lee's primary goal, and this goal must also be carried through to equal access for all users. But this equality of access -- accessibility -- is difficult to quantify, define, or agree upon. In a constantly evolving field, understanding each other can be tricky; indeed, there are many different definitions in the literature, all with a different perspective. This makes it difficult for our community to interact, reach agreement, or share understanding. What is more, it makes it very difficult for those outside the web accessibility community to understand, plan, budget, enact policy, or conform to accessibility requirements and legislation when the community itself has so many, in some cases, conflicting definitions. We asked over 300 people, with an interest in accessibility, to discuss their views and definitions in an attempt to harmonise our understanding and support the expectations of users outside the community. We find that misunderstanding accessibility definitions, language, and terms might cause tension between different groups. That social, and not economic, aspects drive our perspectives of accessibility, and that definitions used by standards and regulatory bodies are most accepted - not those of individual experts. Forcing accessibility adoption does not encourage the acceptance of an accessibility ethos, but providing empirical evidence that accessibility benefits all, does. Finally, realistic and concise language was preferred when attempting to communicate, or define accessibility.","PeriodicalId":339122,"journal":{"name":"International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility","volume":"405 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"61","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Understanding web accessibility and its drivers\",\"authors\":\"Y. Yeşilada, G. Brajnik, Markel Vigo, S. Harper\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/2207016.2207027\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Access is what the web is 'about', it is the motivation behind its creation, and it is the rationale behind HTML. The desire to provide all users at CERN with the ability to access all documents was Tim Berners-Lee's primary goal, and this goal must also be carried through to equal access for all users. But this equality of access -- accessibility -- is difficult to quantify, define, or agree upon. In a constantly evolving field, understanding each other can be tricky; indeed, there are many different definitions in the literature, all with a different perspective. This makes it difficult for our community to interact, reach agreement, or share understanding. What is more, it makes it very difficult for those outside the web accessibility community to understand, plan, budget, enact policy, or conform to accessibility requirements and legislation when the community itself has so many, in some cases, conflicting definitions. We asked over 300 people, with an interest in accessibility, to discuss their views and definitions in an attempt to harmonise our understanding and support the expectations of users outside the community. We find that misunderstanding accessibility definitions, language, and terms might cause tension between different groups. That social, and not economic, aspects drive our perspectives of accessibility, and that definitions used by standards and regulatory bodies are most accepted - not those of individual experts. Forcing accessibility adoption does not encourage the acceptance of an accessibility ethos, but providing empirical evidence that accessibility benefits all, does. Finally, realistic and concise language was preferred when attempting to communicate, or define accessibility.\",\"PeriodicalId\":339122,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility\",\"volume\":\"405 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-04-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"61\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/2207016.2207027\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2207016.2207027","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 61

摘要

访问是web的“目的”,它是创建web的动机,也是HTML背后的基本原理。希望为CERN的所有用户提供访问所有文档的能力是蒂姆·伯纳斯-李的主要目标,这一目标也必须贯彻到所有用户的平等访问。但是这种平等的访问——可访问性——是很难量化、定义或达成一致的。在一个不断发展的领域,相互理解可能很棘手;事实上,在文献中有许多不同的定义,都是从不同的角度来定义的。这使得我们的社区难以互动、达成一致或分享理解。更重要的是,当web易访问性社区本身有如此多的,在某些情况下,相互冲突的定义时,它使得那些在web易访问性社区之外的人很难理解,计划,预算,制定政策,或遵循可访问性需求和立法。我们询问了300多名对无障碍感兴趣的人,讨论他们的观点和定义,试图协调我们的理解并支持社区外用户的期望。我们发现,误解可访问性的定义、语言和术语可能会导致不同群体之间的紧张关系。社会方面而不是经济方面驱动着我们对可访问性的看法,标准和监管机构使用的定义是最被接受的,而不是个别专家的定义。强制采用可访问性并不能鼓励接受可访问性精神,但是提供可访问性对所有人都有利的经验证据却可以。最后,在尝试交流或定义可访问性时,首选现实和简洁的语言。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Understanding web accessibility and its drivers
Access is what the web is 'about', it is the motivation behind its creation, and it is the rationale behind HTML. The desire to provide all users at CERN with the ability to access all documents was Tim Berners-Lee's primary goal, and this goal must also be carried through to equal access for all users. But this equality of access -- accessibility -- is difficult to quantify, define, or agree upon. In a constantly evolving field, understanding each other can be tricky; indeed, there are many different definitions in the literature, all with a different perspective. This makes it difficult for our community to interact, reach agreement, or share understanding. What is more, it makes it very difficult for those outside the web accessibility community to understand, plan, budget, enact policy, or conform to accessibility requirements and legislation when the community itself has so many, in some cases, conflicting definitions. We asked over 300 people, with an interest in accessibility, to discuss their views and definitions in an attempt to harmonise our understanding and support the expectations of users outside the community. We find that misunderstanding accessibility definitions, language, and terms might cause tension between different groups. That social, and not economic, aspects drive our perspectives of accessibility, and that definitions used by standards and regulatory bodies are most accepted - not those of individual experts. Forcing accessibility adoption does not encourage the acceptance of an accessibility ethos, but providing empirical evidence that accessibility benefits all, does. Finally, realistic and concise language was preferred when attempting to communicate, or define accessibility.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信