Enterprise Accessibility Compliance – session 1 at Access U

Presenters from NetCentric Technologies. Goal: to help plan your enterprise accessibility plan.

  1. selecting the appropriates standards for the enterprise
  2. Implementation requirements: content authors, IT and management
  3. structuring the workflow for accessibility
  4. content verification
  5. content remediation
  6. compliance tracking
  7. planning your accessibility project

Selecting the appropriate standard

First we went over an overview of WCAG1.0. Evidently some states are more stringent than others — in Oklahoma there are actually additional requirements that are more stringent that the WCAG. Section 508 is based off Priority 1 of WCAG1.0. Checkpoints a through k of 1194.22 are interpreted as consistent priority 1. Section 508 is undergoing a refresh (the Access Board). Section 508 removed the guideline about clear writing styles (more relevant for people with cognitive difficulties), but added a requirement about skip nav. This is more about usability than accessibility (users can still access the content, but it is less convenient).

There is a perception in the marketplace that if you’re compliant, you’re accessible. This is a misperception, which is in part what is prompting the refresh.

Factors to consider

Regulatory compliance requirements – often an organization has to comply with federal or state rules. Cost and timing also play a role. Some agencies play the “undue burden” card: it is basically a way to get out of this obligation. When deciding on the standard for the enterprise, you also need to consider the impact on the organization.

there is growing awareness of the need for accessible standards, but there is still a ways to go. Education is key. You need to find out who the key players are, and get some buy-in.

Implementation Requirements

Stakeholders: management, content authors, testers, IT, marketing/customer service

Management

  1. what portion of content is subject to standards/how to prioritize?
  2. What is the optimal workflow for ensuring compliance with standards?
  3. how can we measure progress?
  4. What tools and processes do we need to employ?
  5. How does this fit into our infrastructure?
  6. Where should resources be directed to get the maximum ROI?

- Need to set goals and show success, determine when in the process this will be addressed. How do you stay on top of the new content? not only the awareness once you have the buy-in, how do you access compliance?

Authors

  1. what is my responsibility for making docs accessibility
  3. What tools/knowledge do I need
  4. how will this impact other activities

- Strongly recommend training. It is important authors themselves understand, so that the docs themselves need minimal QA after the fact.

IT/ Web Dev/Testers

  1. what is my responsibility for making the documents I verify and publish accessible
  2. What tools/knowledge do I need

Often a question that comes up is related to training – is it worth to invest in training, may want to look at outsourcing accessibility. Also, try to incorporate real-life users if possinle

Implementation requirements key to success

  1. Create buy-in – awareness
  2. accessibility work conducted by authors
  3. accessibility should be quick and easy – similar to spell-checking where possible
  4. where it is not possible to push the accessibility to author’s level, consider having QA check every page
  5. ensure adequate resources are made available
  6. consider outsourcing the accessibility effort
  7. use best-of-breed tools
  8. training
  9. reasonable time frame – implementation

Benefits of Author-Centric Model

  1. better accessibility quality (Authors know the material best)
  2. lower costs (the earlier you catch a problem the less costly to fix)
  3. ensures accessibility awareness spreads across the organization

Structuring the Workflow for Accessibility

Relies on authors to create accessible content, testers to verify it, and then some content remediation as required. Management must perform compliance tracking activities. There is then the question of how to prioritize fixing legacy documents, where do they fit into this workflow?

Verification

  1. Typically involves running schedule tasks to go through the content
  2. Automated vs assisted verification
  3. Outcome is compliance data (reports) with pass/fail/warning status
  4. Must be able to provide global view of the enterprise

there is a drive for reports to be generated to see how people are working towards accessibility compliance

Remediation

  1. Typically involves authors/testers working to remediate docs
  2. automated versus assisted remediation
  3. need to go through testing anew

Compliance Tracking

  1. helps maangement analyzing compliance trends over time
  2. helps prioritize compliance work
  3. helps direct resource shwere they can hae the most impact

Project

  1. First step is selction of accessbility standards (regulatory compliance, achievability, cost)
  2. Consider make versus buy
  3. get management buy-in. Make sure the costs are understood
  4. set out a manageable timeframe/budget for implementation
  5. treat as any other project
  6. ensure you have a plan for dealing with legacy documents
  7. consider training requirements

** I don’t know about the ‘treat it as a plan’ bit. In my project management class, we said that projects were of a limited duration. I think this has to be ongoing.. the presenter said that was true, but there was an initial hump to get over. I do agree with that, but I also think we can’t fall into the trap of thinking we only need to do this for awhile, and it will forever hold true

Project involves three areas: services (make versus buy, how to deal with ‘challenging docs’, conversion services), technology (tools for author, testers, management), and training.

Tools

There are HTML validators available online. The free accessibility checker associated with Adobe Acrobat Reader does not actually meet Section 508 requirements. The presenters spoke to this question reluctantly, as they have their own tools they market and they didnt really want to make this an ad. :)
Alot of the questions are related to ‘documents’: Word, Excel, PDF. They wouldn’t recommend putting Word docs out as web documents. They main focus was for accessibility to be driven by the author. PDF is a challenge, but there is some critical mass surrounding it.

JAWS reads tags view of PDF, nothing else. Common downfall, to only think of single disability.

Can’t overestimate training. Even with the tools, may need training to get the most out of them.
There are business and political drivers to work towards accessibility.