The Accessibility of Ohio Public & Academic Library Web Sites, Past & Present

1. The Accessibility of Ohio Public & Academic Library Web Sites, Past & Present Michael Providenti Robert Zai III April 28, 2008

2. Leading Questions • Has web accessibility improved in the last 5 years? • Are libraries trying to create pages that are more accessible or pages that score well in online accessibility testers? • Is there a correlation between the type of library (academic public, academic private, & public) & accessibility? • Is there a correlation between complexity accessibility?

3. Legal Framework • All private & public academic college and university libraries, as well as public libraries are mandated to provide accessible web sites. • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act • Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act • Title II of the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) • Procurement Laws

4. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act • Cannot discriminate individuals with disabilities • If your institution accepts any federal money • Named protections include • Participation • Benefits • Activities • Services • Programs • Sources • 29 U.S.C. § 794 echoed in 29 U.S.C. § 701, 34 C.F.R. § 104.1 • 42 U.S.C. § 12132

5. Title II of the ADA • Cannot discriminate individuals with disabilities • If your institution is a “place of accommodation,” which includes… • “libraries” • “undergraduate or postgraduate private school, or other place of education” • Named protections include • Goods • Services • Facilities • Privileges • Advantages • Accommodations • Sources • 42 U.S.C. § 12182; echoed in 28 C.F.R. § 36.101 • 42 U.S.C. § 12181 [7][J]; echoed in 28 C.F.R. § 36.104

6. Exceptions? • “undue burden” • “the subsequent substantial expense of providing access is not generally regarded as an undue burden when such cost could have been significantly reduced by considering the issue of accessibility at the time of the initial selection” • 1997 Office for Civil Rights (OCR) letter to the President of California State University (CSU)

7. Exceptions? • “effective communication” • “the transfer of information, including… the resources of the Internet” and outlined three basic components of “effective communication,” • “timeliness of delivery” • “accuracy of the translation,” • “provision in a manner and medium appropriate to the significance of the message and the abilities of the individual with the disability.” • 1997 OCR letter to the President of California State University (CSU)

8. Exceptions? • “effective communication” • “When looking at exactly which of its resources a library is obligated to provide in an accessible medium, the short answer is any resources the library makes available to nondisabled patrons must be made accessible to blind patrons. This includes the library catalogue, the archived microfiche, daily newspapers, and the Internet” • 1997 OCR letter to the President of California State University (CSU)

9. Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act • Based on the Web Accessibility Guidelines • Defines what is Accessible

10. Procurement Laws • States adopt Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act as guidelines for procurement • Kentucky • California • etc.

11. Enforcement • Department of Education - Office for Civil Rights • http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/index.html • Resolution Letters • Department of Justice - Project Civic Access • http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/civicac.htm • Highland County

12. Methodology • The Study Examined • Survey Set • The 10 largest Ohio Pubic 4-Year-Bachelor’s Degree-Granting Institutions with a Library Web Site • Source: College Source • The 10 largest Ohio Private 4-Year-Bachelor’s Degree-Granting Institutions with a Library Web Site • Source: College Source • The 10 largest Ohio Pubic Libraries with a Library Web Site • Source: State Library of Ohio • Scope • Examined only Library Home Page • Dates • Examined 2003 & 2008 • Source: Current Page & the Way Back Machine

13. Methodology Tools • Section 508 • Tester: Cynthia Says • Web Content Accessibility Guidelines • Tester: TAW3 • (X)HTML Validity • Tester: W3C's HTML Validator • Semantic (X)HTML • Tester: W3C’s Semantic Data Extractor • Selected Manual Tests • Tester: Michael & Our Grease Monkey Script • Access Keys • Skip Links • Presence of Headers

14. Methodology Rationale • Survey Set • 10 Largest Public & Private Academic, & Public Libraries • Scope • Library Home Pages • Dates • 2003 & 2008 • Testers • Cynthia Says, TAW3, W3C's HTML Validator, W3C’s Semantic Data Extractor, & Manual Tests (our Grease Monkey Script)

15. Grease Monkey Script

16. Way Back Machine

17. Document Type Definition & Markup Errors

18. Markup Validator

19. 2003 & 2007 Markup Errors (Automated Test)

20. Errors Against WCAG 1.0 & Section 508

21. Common Section 508, Priority 1, Priority 2, & Priority 3 Errors

22. Cynthia Says Section 508 Report

23. TAW3 Reports

24. 2003 to 2008 Section 508, Priority 1, Priority 2, & Priority 3 Average Change (Automated Test)

25. 2003 & 2008 Section 508, Priority 1, Priority 2, & Priority 3Average Percentage of Change (Automated Test)

26. Skip Links • Section 508 (o) • WCAG (13.6)

27. Skip Links

28. 2003 & 2007 Skip Links(Manual Test)

29. Semantic Data & Structure • WCAG (3.2 Validate, 3.5 Use headers, & 3.6 Use lists)

30. Semantic Markup

31. 2003 & 2007 Semantic Outlines (Automated Test)

32. Complex Elements

33. Complex ElementsTables, ISMAP’s, CSS’s, Scripts, Access Keys, Object Parameters, Abbreviations, PRE’s, Marquees, Images, Image Maps, Inputs, Areas, and Embeds (Grease Monkey Counts)

34. Alt Tags

35. Complex ElementsImages, Image Maps, Areas, & Alts (Manual Counts*)

36. Complex ElementsInputs, Alts & Labels (Manual Counts*)

37. Page Size

38. Page Size in Kb’s

39. Summary of Survey

40. 4 Common Errors • Missing • Alternative Text • Input Labels • Skip Links • Semantic Markup

41. A Crass Generalization:2003 Versus 2008

42. Proxy Measurement Caveats • Discrepancies between Cynthia Says, TAW3, & our Grease Monkey Script • Explicit Labels • ALTs? • Are Pages that Test Well are “Truly Accessible,” & Vice Versa? • Subjective vs. Objective • ALTs

43. Common “Free” Tools • General • W3C's "Complete List of Web Accessibility Evaluation Tools“ • http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/tools/complete • WebAIM's "A Review of Free, Online Accessibility Tools“ • http://www.webaim.org/articles/freetools/ • Valid HTML • W3C Markup Validation Service • http://validator.w3.org/ • Web Accessibility Guidelines • TAW3 online • http://www.tawdis.net/taw3/cms/en • Section 508 Compliance • Cynthia Says • http://www.cynthiasays.com • Semantic Markup • Semantic Data Extractor • http://www.w3.org/2003/12/semantic-extractor.html • Browser Plug-ins • Firefox Accessibility Extension 1.01 • https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1891

44. Conclusions? • Has web accessibility improved in the last 5 years? • Are libraries trying to create pages that are more accessible or pages that score well in online accessibility testers? • Is there a correlation between the type of library (academic public, academic private, & public) & accessibility? • Is there a correlation between complexity accessibility?

45. Questions?

46. The Accessibility of Ohio Public & Academic Library Web Sites, Past & Present Michael Providenti Robert Zai III April 28, 2008