Accessibility POC

October 26, 2017

CGI Group Inc. CONFIDENTIAL

Accessibility POC
Introduction
Accessibility Testing is a part of usability testing, and it is performed to ensure that the application being tested is usable by
people with disabilities like hearing, color blindness, old age and other disadvantaged groups. As the web usage is
increasing day by day, it is critical to make our website available to everyone, including the people with disabilities. The Click-
Away Pound (CAP) Survey published in late 2016 by British disability consultancy revealed that 71% of disabled customers
with access needs will click away from a website that they find difficult to use and the potential spending power of these
online shoppers is 11.75 billion, which was spent on other sites that they can access.

Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 are published by the Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) of the World Wide
Web Consortium (W3C). As per WCAG 2.0, we have 12 guidelines organized under 4 principles.

Perceivable 4 Guide Operable 4 Guide lines, Understandable 4 Robust 1 Guide line, 2

lines, 22 Success Criteria 20 Success Criteria) Guide lines, 20 Success Criteria Success Criteria

Provide text alternatives for
non-text content
Provide captions and other
alternatives for multimedia
Create content that can be
presented in different ways,
including by assistive
technologies, without losing
meaning.
Make all functionality
available from a keyboard.
Give users enough time to
read and use content.
Do not use content that
causes seizures.
Help users navigate and find
content.
Make text readable and Maximize compatibility with
understandable. current and future user
tools.
Make content appear and
operate in predictable ways.
Help users avoid and correct
mistakes.

Make it easier for users to

see and hear content.

2
Success Criteria - Manual Testing
.
Perceivable
(Manually testable aspects)
1.1.1 Nontext Content (A)
1.2.1 Prerecorded Audioonly and
Videoonly (A)
1.2.2 Captions (Prerecorded) (A)
1.2.3 Audio Description or Media
Alternative (Prerecorded) (A)
1.2.4 Captions (Live) (AA)
1.2.5 Audio Description
(Prerecorded) (AA)
1.2.6 Sign Language (Prerecorded)
(AAA)
1.2.7 Extended Audio Description
(Prerecorded) (AAA)
1.2.8 Media Alternative
(Prerecorded) (AAA)
1.2.9 Audioonly (Live) (AAA)
1.3.1 Info and Relationships (A)
1.3.2 Meaningful Sequence (A)
1.3.3 Sensory Characteristics (A)
1.4.2 Audio Control (A)
1.4.4 Resize text (AA)
1.4.5 Images of Text (AA)
1.4.7 Low or No Background Audio
(AAA)
1.4.9 Images of Text (No Exception)
(AAA)
Operable Understandable
(Manually testable aspects) (Manually testable aspects)
2.1.1 Keyboard (A) 3.1.1 Language of Page (A)
2.1.2 No Keyboard Trap (A) 3.1.2 Language of Parts (AA)
2.1.3 Keyboard (No Exception) 3.1.3 Unusual Words (AAA)
(AAA)
3.1.4 Abbreviations (AAA)
2.2.1 Timing Adjustable (A)
3.1.5 Reading Level (AAA)
2.2.2 Pause, Stop, Hide (A)
3.1.6 Pronunciation (AAA)
2.2.3 No Timing (AAA)
3.2.1 On Focus (A)
2.2.4 Interruptions (AAA)
3.2.2 On Input (A)
2.2.5 Reauthenticating (AAA)
3.2.3 Consistent Navigation (AA)
2.4.1 Bypass Blocks (A)
3.2.4 Consistent Identification (AA)
2.4.2 Page Titled (A)
3.2.5 Change on Request (AAA)
2.4.3 Focus Order (A)
3.3.1 Error Identification (A)
2.4.4 Link Purpose (A)
3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (A)
2.4.5 Multiple Ways (AA)
3.3.3 Error Suggestion (AA)
2.4.6 Headings and Labels (AA)
3.3.4 Error Prevention (AA)
2.4.7 Focus Visible (AA)
3.3.5 Help (AAA)
2.4.8 Location (AAA)
3.3.6 Error Prevention (All) (AAA)
2.4.9 Link Purpose (Link Only)
(AAA) Principle Success Criteria # Manual # Tool #
2.4.10 Section Headings (AAA)
Perceivable 22 18 4
Operable 20 18 2
Understandable 17 17 0
Robust 2 0 2
Total # 61 53 8
3
Manual Testing - Continued
.
Conformance A AA
Level
Explanation All SCs of level A are
satisfied. This is the
minimum standard which a
website must meet to be
considered accessible for
any significant disability
groups.
All SCs of Level A and AA
are satisfied. This is a
"professional practice standard,
which a website should meet to be
accessible to a broad range of
disability groups.
AAA
All SCs (at all conformance
levels) are satisfied. This is a
"gold standard" of
maximum accessibility which
some websites may choose.

Manual/User based Testing Pros and Cons

Pros Cons

Evaluator is able to observe people encountering (and
hopefully overcoming) real usability/accessibility problems
in real time.
Accurately identify problems that actually prevent specific
groups of people from accessing web content.
Test participants are able to rate the severity of the
problems they encounter and identify those that are likely
to be catastrophic.
Likely to generate highly valid results for people who have
the same disabilities.
The cost of setting up labs is quite high.
User testing with large samples is often beyond the
expertise or financial resources of a typical web developer
and is more time consuming than other methods.
Finding disabilities that match the website audience can be
difficult.
The need for expert evaluator
Difficulties in preparing testing materials, in developing
realistic scenarios of tasks and in choosing the right sample
size for the test

4
 Success Criteria - Tool Testing
. Perceivable Operable Robust
(Tool testable aspects) (Tool testable aspects) (Tool testable aspects)

1.4.1 Use of Color (A) 2.3.1 Three Flashes or Below Threshold (A) 4.1.1 Parsing (A)
1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) (AA) 2.3.2 Three Flashes (AAA) 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value (A)
1.4.6 Contrast (Enhanced) (AAA)
1.4.8 Visual Presentation (AAA)

Tool based Testing Pros and Cons

Pros Cons

Automated testing is faster than manual testing
Able to identify a large and diverse range of non-compliance
issues that might cause problems for a variety of potential
end users and/or technologies.
The checklist items often provide a clear indication of what is
required to rectify non-compliance.
Some tools integrate with the development environment to
improve the efficiency of remedial work
Some tools can fix some faults automatically
Easy to incorporate into the different phases of the site
development process and this can be particularly useful in
an agile or iterative development environment.
Automated tools can only test approximately 25% of WCAG checkpoints.
They can highlight the need for manual testing of some checkpoints, but for
others they can make no assessment at all
A lot of tuning and configuration can be required to minimize false positives
Some coding errors and techniques can result in non-compliance not be
reported
Data overload occurs if the website is not already reasonably accessible.
Tools can produce tens of thousands of error reports that are impossible to
process in any meaningful way
Licensing for multiple users and domains can become prohibitively
expensive
Some guidelines are not checked properly (e.g. alt attribute).
Automated tools results are hard to analyze by inexperienced web
developers, which can affect the quality of the test process.
Can give inaccurate results and results can vary from one tool to another,
depending on interpretation of the guidelines.

5
 Tools identified as part of POC
.
S.No Tool Name S/W Type Purpose
1 VisCheck Freeware To simulate colorblind vision

2 CheckmyColours Freeware To check foreground and background color contrast ratios

3 Achecker Freeware To check various accessibility standards
4 NV Access Freeware Screen reader S/W for visually impaired people
5 JAWS Licensed Screen reader S/W for visually impaired people

Sample Accessibility reports produced by the tool

Website Tested: https://www.cibc.com/en/personal-banking.html

6
 Thank you
Our commitment to you
We approach every engagement with one
objective in mind: to help clients succeed