<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Towards Metrics for Web Accessibility Evaluation</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Norte Av. W</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>- Sala A</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>- Asa Norte - Brasília - DF - Brasil - CEP</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>stlima@gmail.com</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Fernanda Lima</string-name>
          <email>ferlima@ucb.br</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Author Keywords Web accessibility</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Metrics</addr-line>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>Káthia Marçal de Oliveira Universidade Católica de Brasília</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2">
          <label>2</label>
          <institution>Universidade Católica de Brasília</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <pub-date>
        <year>2007</year>
      </pub-date>
      <fpage>11</fpage>
      <lpage>14</lpage>
      <abstract>
        <p>Nowadays, accessibility is a crucial factor for Web site development and use, and yet, people with visual disabilities face many accessibility barriers that hinder the adequate understanding of Web contents. In Brazil, the Federal Government published a law that formalizes the mandatory accessibility to Governmental Web sites' content. In this context, it is necessary to define ways to evaluate accessibility to guarantee the quality of these sites in this respect. Therefore, this article proposes a means of Web accessibility evaluation through metrics.</p>
      </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>
        INTRODUCTION
Organizations use Web technology to make products
and services available to potential clients. In this
context, Web content accessibility is an important
component of quality that must be observed among
services offered by Web site providers. In Brazil, the
Law Decree 5.296 explicitly states this importance, by
compelling Governmental Web site contents to be in
accordance with Web accessibility guidelines.
Therefore, it is crucial to define a means of evaluating
accessibility in order to allow the elaboration of better
software contracts between clients and providers. In this
aspect, Service Level Agreements (SLAs) are used to
establish minimum quality patterns pertaining to
services supplied by providers to their clients [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">10</xref>
        ]. The
SLA’s main component is a service catalog where one
can define, among other things, measurable factors, or
indicators that will permit visibility as to the specified
service levels that were either violated or respected.
The present work proposes the use of software metrics
to evaluate the accessibility that can be used to define
service level indicators for Web accessibility SLAs. The
following sections present Web accessibility concepts,
our approach to Web accessibility evaluation and the
work in progress.
      </p>
      <p>
        WEB ACCESSIBILITY
Web accessibility means that people with visual,
physical, speech, cognitive or neurological disabilities
are given the opportunity to perceive, understand,
navigate and interact with the Web [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">7</xref>
        ]. According to
[12], to perceive is “to become aware of something via
the senses”; to understand is to grasp the meaning of
something; and to interact is “to have and effect on each
other”.
      </p>
      <p>According to W3C [1], evaluating Web sites for
accessibility can be done using approaches such as:
preliminary review, conformance evaluation using
accessibility tools to determine if a Web site meets
accessibility standards such as the Web Content
Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) and involving users
in the evaluation.</p>
      <p>
        The WCAG [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">4</xref>
        ] proposes 14 general guidelines which
are composed of checkpoints that explain specific
accessibility aspects and techniques to use them; and of
priorities that show how critical their implementation is.
The current version of WCAG recommendations is 1.0.
In the 2.0 WCAG Working Drafts [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">5</xref>
        ], verification
points and priorities have changed to ‘success criteria’
and ‘conformance levels’. Furthermore, the guidelines
were regrouped into four basic principles: “(i) Content
must be perceivable, (ii) Interface components in the
content must be operable, (iii) Content and controls
must be understandable, (iv) Content should be robust
enough to work with current and future user agents
(including assistive technologies)”. Each principle
contains general guidelines organized into levels and
success criteria. The W3C Consortium describes the
relationship between the two versions [3].
      </p>
      <p>
        Other methods to evaluate Web accessibility can be
found in the literature [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">6</xref>
        ][
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">11</xref>
        ]. One of these methods,
called participatory observation [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">11</xref>
        ], proposes the
evaluation of interactive sessions with disabled users
and an observer, in an effort to identify barriers in Web
access and strategies found by the user to try to
overcome them.
      </p>
      <p>
        OUR APPROACH TO EVALUATE WEB
ACCESSIBILITY
In this research, the Goal-Question-Metric (GQM)
approach [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">2</xref>
        ] was used to define what was going to be
evaluated. The main idea of GQM is that measurement
should be goal-oriented. Initially, an explicit
measurement goal is defined. Subsequently this goal is
refined into several questions that break it down into its
major components. Then, each question is refined into
metrics that, when measured, will provide information
to answer these questions. By answering the questions
we will be able to analyze if the goal has been attained.
The GQM goal for this work is:
      </p>
      <p>
        To analyze Web sites,
for the purpose of evaluating,
with respect to accessibility,
from the view points of users with disabilities,
in the context of Brazilian Federal Government.
According to the definitions presented in the previous
section, it was possible to identify that accessibility
evaluation means, mainly, to evaluate the user’s
capacity to perceive, operate and understand Web site
content. Furthermore, there is a concern, associated
with accessibility, with respect to user capacity to reach
the desired objective with an acceptable effort in a
satisfactory manner. This aspect is explored by ISO/IEC
9126 [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">8</xref>
        ] with respect to quality in use, i.e., the software
product’s capacity to guarantee that users will reach
their specific goals with efficacy, productivity, security
and satisfaction, in specific contexts of use. Based on
these premises, the following questions were elaborated
to evaluate accessibility:
Q1. What is the degree of perception with respect to
Web site contents?
Q2. What is the degree of ease of operation of Web site
contents?
Q3. What is the degree of understanding of Web site
contents?
Q4. What is the user’s efficacy in specific task
execution while interacting with the Web sites?
Q5. What is the percentage of user productivity in
specific task execution while interacting with the Web
sites?
Q6. What is the degree of user satisfaction in specific
task execution while interacting with the Web sites?
Based on the comparison between the two WCAG
versions, metrics were defined to answer these
questions (Table 1). The data was obtained in two ways:
using a questionnaire filled out during participatory
observation sessions and using an automatic tool called
TAW [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">14</xref>
        ]. The tool was chosen, among other reasons,
because of its capacity to evaluate pages of arbitrary
depth in a Web site and generating HTML reports with
quantity of violations per page.
      </p>
      <p>Three Brazilian Federal Government Web sites were
chosen on which to apply these metrics
(www.receita.fazenda.gov.br, www.previdencia.gov.br,
and www.ibge.gov.br). The choices were based on the
results of a Brazilian contest named iBEST Contest,
where the best Brazilian sites, divided into different
categories, receive prizes annually. The three sites
above received the best prizes for the Government
category.</p>
      <p>One task was defined for each site. The first task was to
find out whether a person is going to receive income tax
returns, by filling out two fields: a number similar to a
Social Security Number and a dynamically generated
image shown as a capcha field (a code shown as a
distorted image for security purposes). The second task
was to identify the necessary documents to apply for a
Social Security application. The third task was to find
the Contact part of the site and identify the subjects that
can be dealt with by email.</p>
      <p>
        During participatory observation sessions, the tasks
were executed by ten users with varying degrees of
visual disability and different Web use expertise. All the
sessions were conducted in environments with personal
computers with keyboard, mouse, speakers, Web
browsers (Internet Explorer or Firefox Mozilla) and
screen reader software (Jaws or Virtual Vision).
Our approach was presented to the Brazilian scientific
community in previous events related to multimedia and
Web [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">9</xref>
        ] and software quality [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">10</xref>
        ]. These papers show
some of the preliminary results. The current results
(Table 1) show that the Web content levels of
perception and understanding increase whenever the
quantity of violations to the WCAG 1.0 checkpoints
decreases. Analyzing the results of questions 1, 2 and 3,
one can conclude that task 1 had the lowest degree of
perception, operation and understanding, while task 3
obtained the best levels of the accessibility principles.
WORK IN PROGRESS
Through the analysis of metrics and obtained data, it
was possible to define a preliminary parallel that
indicates the following: the lower the degree of
perception, operation and understanding of web content,
the lower will be the efficacy, the productivity, and the
satisfaction of the users, during task execution with
those contents.
      </p>
      <p>The next steps aim to improve the analysis of the
metrics, in order to produce indicators that can be used
to compose a service catalog for a Web accessibility
SLA. Accessibility SLAs will be useful by contributing
to accessibility initiatives, in the future, as formal
instruments, between Web content developers and
clients.</p>
      <p>REFERENCES
1. Abou-Zahra and EOWG. Evaluating Web Sites for
Accessibility: Overview.
http://www.w3.org/WAI/eval/Overview.html
3. Candwell, B. et al. (Editors) Comparison of WCAG
1.0 checkpoints to WCAG 2.0. 2006.
http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/appendixD.html.
(Editors).</p>
      <p>2005
Dictionary
(TAW).</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Basili</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>V. R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Caldiera</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Rombach</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H. D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>The Goal Question Metric Paradigm</article-title>
          . Encyclopedia of Software Engineering, v.
          <volume>1</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>528</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>32</lpage>
          . John Wiley &amp; Sons,
          <year>1994</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          4.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Chisholm</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>W.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Vanderheiden</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Jacobs</surname>
          </string-name>
          , I. (Editors)
          <article-title>Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1</article-title>
          .
          <fpage>0</fpage>
          .
          <year>1999</year>
          . http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          5.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Henry</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S. L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <article-title>Editor) WCAG 2 FAQ</article-title>
          .
          <year>2007</year>
          . http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/wcag2faq.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          6.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Henry</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S. L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Just</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Ask: Integrating Accessibility Throughout Design</article-title>
          . http://www.w3.org/WAI/eval/users.html#ut-access.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          7.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Henry</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S. L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and EOWG Group Introduction to Web Accessibility. http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/accessibility.php.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          8. International Organization for Standardization.
          <source>ISO/IEC 9126-1. Software Engineering - Product quality - Part</source>
          <volume>1</volume>
          :
          <string-name>
            <surname>Quality</surname>
            <given-names>model</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <year>2001</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          9.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lima</surname>
          </string-name>
          , S. T.;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lima</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Oliveira</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K M</given-names>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Investigação da Acessibilidade em Sítios Web do Governo Brasileiro: Uma Abordagem para o Estabelecimento de SLA de Acessibilidade</article-title>
          .
          <source>Proc Brazilian WebMedia 2006 Symposium</source>
          , SBC Press (
          <year>2006</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          10.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lima</surname>
          </string-name>
          , S. T.;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lima</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Oliveira</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>K M. Avaliação</surname>
          </string-name>
          da Acessibilidade de Sítios Web por meio de métricas de software.
          <source>Proc Brazilian Software Quality 2007 Symposium</source>
          , SBC Press (
          <year>2007</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          11.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Melo</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Baranauskas</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.C.C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bonilha</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.F.G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Avaliação de acessibilidade na Web com a participação do usuário: um estudo de caso</article-title>
          .
          <source>Proc Brazilian IHC Symposium</source>
          , SBC Press (
          <year>2004</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          13.
          <article-title>Office for Government Commerce Itil</article-title>
          . The Key to Manage IT Services: Service Delivery - Version 1.2;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Crow</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <year>2001</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>14. Web Accessibility Test http://www.tawdis.net/taw3/cms/en</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>