TECHNOLOGY
Initiative seeks more accessible Web tools, software for disabled

Melissa Mitchell, News Editor
(217) 333-5491; melissa@uiuc.edu

12/1/2001

Photo by Bill Wiegand Jon Gunderson, coordinator of assistive communication and information technologies in the UI Division of Rehabilitation-Education Services, also is chair of the User Agent Accessibility working group of the World Wide Web Consortium, which recently announced it was inviting developers to implement its Web Accessibility Initiative guidelines for designing more accessible browsers, multimedia players and other Web software.

CHAMPAIGN, Ill. — Companies that develop and distribute browsers, multimedia players and other Web-based software have become more savvy in recent years when it comes to understanding the needs of people with disabilities.

But they still have a way to go before they can claim to actually meet those needs, according to Jon Gunderson, coordinator of assistive communication and information technologies in the University of Illinois’ Division of Rehabilitation-Education Services. Gunderson also is chair of the User Agent Accessibility working group of the World Wide Web Consortium, which recently announced it was inviting developers to implement its Web Accessibility Initiative guidelines for designing more accessible browsers, multimedia players and other Web software.

The W3C’s Web Accessibility Initiative is an ongoing, multi-pronged effort, Gunderson said. Goals of the initiative include ensuring that Web technology supports accessibility; developing accessibilty guidelines; guiding the development of tools for evaluating and repairing inaccessible Web sites; conducting education and outreach, and supporting research and development of technologies that improve access to the Web by people with disabilities. To date, W3C has published two other sets of guidelines: one on how authors can create accessible Web content, and another, on how to design tools that are accessible to authors with disabilities, and that produce accessible Web content.

Gunderson said that while the technology exists to make software more accessible, there are a variety of reasons why companies have been slow to make adaptations – ranging from monetary reasons and lack of knowledge to a failure by disability organizations to apply pressure. However, he said, "most companies say the biggest reason they don’t do it is, ‘Customers don’t ask us.’ "

"The biggest thing individuals can do (to effect change) is to ask about accessibility features," he said. "The number one response from companies, when asked, is ‘Oh, we’re accessible.’ " In reality, the software doesn’t really deliver many of the features that could best assist users.

Such features include keyboard support for users who are blind or have a physical disability that makes it hard to use a mouse; configuration options, which allow people to control fonts, color and text size; and compatibility with specialized software, such as speech synthesizers or screen magnifiers.

So, Gunderson said, after a sales pitch that suggests accessibility, the user should fire back with the following questions: "What guidelines do you follow?" And, "Have you tested the product?"

"There are ways to get companies to respond through backdoor arm-twisting" – notably, through campaigns by organizations such as the W3C – "but that only goes so far," Gunderson said. "The more people ask, the more companies will respond. And, people should ask if they follow prescribed guidelines, and if they can prove it."

More information on W3C’s Web Accessibility Initiative is available at www.w3.org/WAI.