1 / 28

California State University’s methodology for driving Web accessibility

California State University’s methodology for driving Web accessibility. Cheryl Pruitt - CSU Director, Accessible Technology Initiative California State University Office of the Chancellor Jeff Singleton - HiSoftware , Inc . Senior Web Accessibility Consultant Sue Cullen- CSUN

lev
Télécharger la présentation

California State University’s methodology for driving Web accessibility

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. California State University’s methodology for driving Web accessibility Cheryl Pruitt- CSU Director, Accessible Technology Initiative California State University Office of the Chancellor Jeff Singleton - HiSoftware, Inc. Senior Web Accessibility Consultant Sue Cullen- CSUN Program Manager, Universal Design Center Product Testing Coordinator for the CSU Accessible Technology Network Alen Davoudian-CSUN Web Developer / IT Consultant Universal Design Center

  2. CSU ATI Web Accessibility Goal • Campus and vendor websites will be as accessible as possible at time of publishing or purchase • Two of the objectives necessary for meeting the goal • Baseline testing requirements that the CSU campuses could easily follow • Wide tool deployment to campus user groups • CSU and HiSoftware created an implementation plan to achieve these objectives. • The implementation plan is helping campuses utilize HiSoftware Compliance Sheriff® to its full potential.

  3. Implementation: Standardized CSU ATI Accessibility Requirements • Problem: No clear baseline testing requirements that the CSU campuses could easily follow. The CSU testing procedure includes both automated and manual testing requirements and these requirements were not applied the same on all campuses • Solution: Create a customized set of testing requirements that include both automated and manual testing criteria, and provide repair resources. Deploy the standardized testing requirements to campuses.

  4. Implementation: Wide User Deployment • Problem: Narrow deployment to user groupsmainly as audit tool rather than a tool that could be integrated into the web workflow • The HiSoftware Compliance Sheriff® tool should be available to all campus user groups so testing can be done and accessibility problems repaired before or at the time of publishing to the web. Vendor websites should be tested before purchase and monitored after purchase. • Solution: Work with HiSoftware to create an expanded set of user roles and permissions that will give campus users more granular access control; and develop a phased deployment plan to roll out the tool to all potential users.

  5. CSU HiSoftware Implementation Plan Standardized Testing Requirements • Successful HiSoftware Compliance Sheriff® Implementation Wide Tool Deployment Effective Training and Support

  6. Implementation: Effective Training & Support • HiSoftware • Improved customer support, Jeff Singleton, Senior Web Accessibility Consultant works closely with CSU campuses to ensure that support issues and user questions are quickly addressed. • CSU Accessible Technology Network (CSUATN)leverages accessibility expertise across the CSU system. • Universal Design Center (UDC) at CSUN provides additional training and support for the CSU campuses. Sue Cullen and the UDC staff maintain and enhance the CSU ATI Accessibility Requirements and provide additional training.

  7. State of the CSU - Today • 21 Campuses are participating in the HiSoftware Compliance Sheriff® contract • Standardized Testing Requirements • CSU ATI Accessibility Requirements are deployed across the system • Periodic updates with enhancements have been released • Wide User Deployment • HiSoftware released a new version of Compliance Sheriff that included enhanced Roles and Permissions • Compliance Deputy • Effective Training and Support • CSUN and Jeff are providing excellent training and support

  8. Consider Your Tools • Will it meet your existing needs? • Will it meet your future needs? • Who needs access? • What checkpoints or rule sets are included Out of Box? • Is the checkpoint logic exposed? • Can you edit Out of Box checkpoints or create them from scratch? • Is the reporting flexible/customizable for various audiences?

  9. Benefits of Standardization of Tools • Tools assess content differently, mixing tools produce different results • Standardization brings consistency across organization • Lowers cost per page • Lowers cost of training • Lowers cost of catching issues early • Lower cost of confusion

  10. CSU/HS Partnership • CSU taking an Enterprise Level approach • HiSoftware Compliance Sheriff updated to address CSU’s needs • Group Permissions • Compliance Deputy (beta) • Developers • Content Creators • Ongoing benefits seen on both sides • For CSU, a process that works and is showing results • For HS, a better understanding how customers use product/better product

  11. Importance of Checkpoint Rules • Out of Box CS provides checkpoints for Section 508, WCAG 2.0, etc. • These checkpoints designed to meet most common needs • Focus is on sticking closely to written standard • Most organizations use a mix of standards and guidelines • CSU needed to map Section 508 to meet specific program requirements • CSU also desired to use a robust set of guidelines to meet the needs of users, not to just “check a box” (WCAG 2.0) • CS allows checkpoint creation/customization to empower users

  12. Training and Support • System-wide solution needs system-wide training & support • CSU & HS work together to: • Train users • Resolve issues • Applying/understanding of standards & guidelines • Remember, for most accessibility: • Is only one of their many job duties • Can’t be learned/fully understood overnight • Needs to be introduced over time • Training and Support is critical to success

  13. CSU Compliance Sheriff Feedback Form http://www.csun.edu/accessibility/checkpoint/form.htm

  14. System Wide Support and Collaboration • Data gathering • Discussions • Collaborate Conference Sessions • Shared Trainings • Agreed upon requirements • Customize for differences

  15. Deployment @ CSUN • Naming Convention • Check Points • Reports for each area and type of report • Define Web Environment • Domains • Departments • Programs • ID Contacts for each area

  16. Training Basics • Develop skills over time and need • View Reports • Customize Views • Run Scan • Run Scan with Log Ins • At CSUN only UDC creates Check Points

  17. Cultural Change for Web Design Integrate compliance standard skills into everyday work habits & expectation of employees.

  18. Protocols for Compliance & Usability Testing

  19. Shared Training Resources

  20. UDC Mission • Assist the campus community in creating pathways for individuals to learn, communicate, and share via information technology. • Help the campus community design-in interoperability, usability, and accessibility into information technology so that individual learning and processing styles, or differences in physical characteristics are not barriers to accessing information.

  21. UDC Services: • Consultation/Training of Instructional Materials compliance and usability • Web application developers training to design-in web compliance and usability evaluation • Consultation regarding accessibility and usability policy • Compliance and usability testing for purchased, promoted, or supported (PPS) campus software. (based on campus impact) • Maintaining a vetted, centralized repository of ATI training material • Research, identify or create compliance standard application coding techniques. • Compliance testing of websites, software and electronic devices.

  22. Custom CSU.Scripting Description: • Identifies Script and Google Analytics • The use of Script will be identified. Attempt to provide accessible Script. If this is not possible provide an equally effective <noscript> element. Error Identification: • If Google Analytics code is present, webpages are not flagged for having any other JavaScript code. Refinement: • Checkpoint script was modified to exclude Google Analytics and report the presence of any other scripting.

  23. Custom CSU.Scripting Rule:

  24. Custom CSU.1.0 Description: • Validates all links. • Checks anchors (hyperlinks and bookmarks) in web sites to find broken links. Checkpoint filters out the Google Analytics script. Error Identification: • Checkpoint reports “https://ssl/” and “http://www/” expressions, included in the Google Analytics, as broken links. This prevents cluttering reports with unnecessary entries pointing to links within the Google Analytics code. Refinement: • Checkpoint was modified to exclude the Google Analytics links from the broken links.

  25. Custom CSU.1.0 Rule:

  26. Custom CSU.H37a Description: • Use alt attributes on image elements. • When using the <img> element, specify a short text alternative with the “alt” attribute. The value of this attribute is referred to as "alt text". Alt text is a text replacement for an image which is used to explain what the image is and what it is trying to convey to the user. Error Identification: • Checkpoint passes empty ALT attribute for image element inside an anchor with no text. In other words, images without link text and without alt attribute would not be flagged in the report. Refinement: • Checkpoint was modified to report error on images inside anchors with no link text and empty ALT attribute.

  27. Custom CSU.H37a Rule:

  28. Resources that can provide in-house guidance based on internal requirements Example:

More Related