Aniversario de la Directiva europea sobre accesibilidad web

La Directiva europea 2016/2102, también conocida como Web Accessibility Directive (WAD), entró en vigor el 22 de diciembre de 2016. En Web Accessibility Directive — Standards and harmonisation está disponible un resumen de esta directiva.

El 23 de septiembre es una fecha importante para esta directiva porque:

• 23 de septiembre de 2018: entra en vigor la Directiva.
• 23 de septiembre de 2019: fecha límite para que los nuevos sitios web sean accesibles.
• 23 de septiembre de 2020: fecha límite para que los sitios web existentes sean accesibles.

WCAG 2.1 ha sido actualizado

Ayer, 21 de septiembre de 2023, se actualizó WCAG 2.1. 

Mientras tanto, WCAG 2.2 sigue como "Proposed Recommendation".

Publicado el 2023 Digital Accessibility Index

Se acaba de publicar el 2023 Digital Accessibility Index:

We scanned almost 40,000 enterprise websites to measure the accessibility of the world’s largest brands. Then we worked with members of the disability community to test key pages on the top sites in industries like retail, finance, and travel.

Y los principales resultados:

56% of images are not accessible to people with visual impairments, which can prevent them from being able to understand or benefit from any information conveyed by the image.

64% of pages have links that are not clear to people with some visual and cognitive impairments, which can make it difficult for them to navigate between pages or find the information they need.

25% of forms are missing clear labels, which can make it difficult for people with disabilities to know what to enter into each field — impacting key tasks like checkout or account creation.

Historia de la accesibilidad web

En el vídeo Getting started – Understanding the history of web accessibility se resume la historia de la accesibilidad web:

El funcionamiento de las API de accesibilidad muy bien explicado

En los siguientes artículos, se explica muy bien el funcionamiento de las API de accesibilidad que emplean los productos de apoyo (por ejemplo, los lectores de pantalla) para acceder al contenido que muestra el ordenador y transmitirlo al usuario final:

1. Swinging Through the Accessibility Tree Like a Ring-Tailed Lemur
2. The Road to Good Intentions Is Paved with Hell
3. Your Browser May Be Having a Secret Relationship with a Screen Reader

ARIA puede ayudar a la accesibilidad web, pero también la puede dañar

En ARIA can hurt or help web accessibility: How to review your website’s ARIA se advierte de los peligros que tiene el mal uso de ARIA:

Not all HTML elements have accessibility built into them. So, we use ARIA to add accessibility when a native HTML element cannot do the job.

When used correctly, ARIA can help people with disabilities access and use your website – when used correctly. Unfortunately, it’s misused all over the web.

Using ARIA incorrectly can actually make your website more inaccessible. It can unintentionally hide content from assistive technology, announce the wrong label, and cause functionality confusion for assistive tech users.

To actually make a more accessible web experience for all users, ARIA needs to be used correctly. A great place to start is looking at the ARIA your own website already uses.

Going through your own website’s ARIA can make it more accessible while also giving you a chance to learn more about ARIA (nothing like a hands-on learning experience).

La accesibilidad de los números

En Making Numbers in Web Content Accessible se explican los problemas que los números presentan para la accesibilidad del contenido web:

Numbers are a key part of how we express ourselves and communicate with each other. They are often used to express concepts that are critical to our way of life: cultural, financial, medical, legal … numbers play an enormously important role in our lives.

It makes sense, then, that when we use numbers in web content, they must be made accessible to all people. In this article, we’re going to explore what the major issues are for number accessibility in web content, who it affects and how, and what web creators can do about it.

Actualización de WCAG 3

Ayer (24/07/2023) se publicó una actualización de W3C Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 3.0. 

En WCAG 3 Introduction se proporciona una introducción de WCAG 3.

Reglamento de las condiciones de utilización de la lengua de signos española y de los medios de apoyo a la comunicación oral para las personas sordas, con discapacidad auditiva y sordociegas

El 19/07/2023 se publicó en el BOE el Real Decreto 674/2023, de 18 de julio, por el que se aprueba el Reglamento de las condiciones de utilización de la lengua de signos española y de los medios de apoyo a la comunicación oral para las personas sordas, con discapacidad auditiva y sordociegas.

En el Artículo 4. Definiciones se define la sordoceguera de la siguiente forma:

m) Sordoceguera: discapacidad única con entidad propia que resulta de la combinación de dos deficiencias sensoriales, la auditiva y la visual, que genera barreras de comunicación únicos y necesidades específicas y heterogéneas en las personas sordociegas, que hacen que puedan ser usuarias, alternativa o simultáneamente, de la lengua de signos española, del braille y de los diversos medios de apoyo a la comunicación oral, aumentativos y alternativos, con servicios especializados de comunicación y acompañamiento prestados por personal específicamente formado para su atención para hacer frente a las actividades de la vida diaria.

En el Artículo 4. Definiciones aparecen algunas definiciones interesantes sobre la comunicación de las personas sordociegas:

d) Lengua de signos táctil o apoyada: adaptación al tacto de la lengua de signos española que hacen las personas sordociegas que utilizan esta lengua para comunicarse cuando su visión ya no les permite seguir el movimiento de las manos de quien se comunica con ellos en esta lengua. Las personas sordociegas colocan sus manos sobre las de la persona interlocutora signante para percibir a través del tacto y la propiocepción las distintas configuraciones de las manos y los movimientos de estas y así seguir lo que le dice y comprender el mensaje.

4.º Sistemas alfabéticos: sistemas que se apoyan en el deletreo del mensaje como el sistema dactilológico o alfabeto manual, el dactilológico en palma, el uso de tablilla de comunicación y el uso de mayúsculas sobre la palma. El sistema dactilológico o alfabeto manual es aquel donde cada letra se corresponde con una configuración de la mano y dedos del interlocutor, que se puede realizar en el aire y que se capta de forma visual; el dactilológico en palma, en el que cada letra es representada sobre la palma de la mano de la persona sordociega, para que pueda captarlas táctilmente; el uso de una tablilla de comunicación, donde el interlocutor señala junto con la persona sordociega las letras en relieve para formar una palabra, o las mayúsculas sobre la palma, donde el interlocutor escribe con su dedo índice las letras en mayúsculas que componen las palabras una sobre otra, en el centro de la palma de la mano de la persona sordociega.

5.º Sistema Dactyls: sistema alternativo de comunicación táctil de carácter mixto. Consiste en transmitir el mensaje, combinando el uso del alfabeto dactilológico táctil con la incorporación de signos táctiles y otros recursos propios del sistema, sobre la base de unas reglas gramaticales que regulan su funcionamiento

6.º Sistema de signos Haptic: es un método de comunicación complementario que sirve para conocer toda la información del contexto que se suele proporcionar en la espalda, o en el brazo. De este modo, la persona sordociega recibe una información completa que le proporciona más independencia y, además, puede tomar decisiones de forma autónoma, conociendo todo lo que ocurre a su alrededor.

WCAG 2.2 posiblemente será una recomendación en agosto 2023

Según la nota WCAG 2.2 final web standard expected in August 2023, es posible que WCAG 2.2 se publique como recomendación, es decir, la versión final, en agosto 2023.

A la espera de WCAG 2.2

Mientras seguimos a la espera de la publicación definitiva de Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2, podemos leer algunos de los artículos que resumen las novedades de WCAG 2.2 como, por ejemplo, WCAG 2.2, quick and simplified, que se lee en 2 minutos.

Adrian Roselli, experto en accesibilidad web, denunciado por hablar de las capas de accesibilidad (accessibility overlays)

Muy sorprendente todo lo que se cuenta en New Low in the Accessibility “Industry:” Overlay Company Sues Globally-Recognized Accessibility Expert:

This is an article about a lawsuit filed against a digital accessibility advocate named Adrian Roselli.  Adrian has been outspoken against a type of software called an overlay. This type of overlay promises to make websites accessible for disabled people with just one line of code. Lainey has criticized this software too. Adrian was sued by AudioEye, a company that sells overlays.  It is Lainey’s opinion that this lawsuit is a SLAPP suit. Those initials stand for “Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.”  Adrian has been part of an urgent global dialogue about harms caused by overlays. And about their failure to meet the promise of website accessibility. Lainey urges AudioEye and its lawyers at a big global law firm called Akin to drop this lawsuit.

Accessible Perceptual Contrast Algorithm (APCA)

Accessible Perceptual Contrast Algorithm (APCA) es el nuevo método para calcular el contraste entre colores que va a sustituir al método actual que se emplea en WCAG.

En Why APCA as a New Contrast Method? explican:

Readability is a critically important aspect of web content, affecting 99% of internet users. For years, the WCAG 2.x contrast guidelines provided some guidance toward readability but are being replaced for the future WCAG 3.0. Here is an overview of the need for this change and discussion of the candidate replacement, the Accessible Perceptual Contrast Algorithm (APCA).

WCAG 2.x contrast and 1.4.3 and the related understandings and guidelines were born in an era before smart phones and iPads, when displays were mostly CRT type and websites used core web fonts. But that was a decade and a half ago. Today the contrast guidelines are in need of a complete overhaul due to the massive changes in computer display technology, web content, CSS functionality, and advances in vision science since 2005/2008, when WCAG 2.x was first introduced. For deeper background, see the author’s thread circa April 2019 in WCAG issue 695.

There are a number of reasons that WCAG 2.x contrast is faulty, one of which is the binary pass/fail nature of the SC for a property that does not apply in a binary way across perception nor impairments. Humans are not binary computers, and it is important to understand the non-linear aspects of perception, and to set guidelines that correctly model perception as opposed to “brute forcing” arbitrary values that ultimately do more harm than good.

Y APCA CONTRAST CALCULATOR es una herramienta online que permite calcular la diferencia de contraste según el nuevo algoritmo.

Lista de cosas relacionadas con la accesibilidad que Apple y Google hacen mal e insisten en hacer mal

Impresionante la lista recopilada por Adrian Roselli en I Don’t Care What Google or Apple or Whoever Did:

A very very quick selection of decisions that Google and Apple made that were counter to what experienced usability and UX experts recommended:

• Google Material Design told us form fields were better without boxes, until they tested it.
• Apple told us removing button outlines in iOS was better, until users complained.
• Google relies on color alone for links in search results, which is a WCAG violation.
• Apple went with super-thin typefaces in iOS, until finally making them thicker in subsequent releases.
• Google Chrome uses a default blue focus indicator, which is invisible on their own blue-background navigation.
• Apple thought animating apps on launch was cool, until users with vestibular orders got sick.
• Google deploys an update to its browser that can break the web for screen reader users, and lets it sit for for two releases.
• Apple for years has hidden the semantics of lists when they are styled, forcing developers to use hacks to reinsert them.
• Google shares lessons learned from its commendable Disability Support team in the form of an inaccessible PDF document that insists it cannot make accessible.
• Apple continues to fail to build VoiceOver support for an HTML element that has existed since the dawn of HTML and 2½ times longer than VoiceOver on iPhone.
• YouTube announces it is removing the ability for community members to contribute subtitles or captions to videos.
• Apple still does not send a focus event when a native button is clicked, an issue first reported in 2009, again in 2012, again in 2013, and yet again in 2013.
• Both Apple and Google are content to let crowd-funding efforts drive the addition of accessibility features (:focus-visible and inert) or CSS feature support (:not()) to their browsers.
• Apple makes a landing page touting its accessibility accomplishments, but the page itself has accessibility issues (not all are false positives, despite response).
• Google has a VPAT for Gmail that does not accurately describe its conformance, easily provable, and frustrating yet another claim of “but Google uses these colors”.
• Definitely do not follow YouTube as a good (or passable) example of how to build and use tabs.
• Google tweets a silent text-heavy video to promote its event for International Day of Persons with Disabilities, which is retweeted by the Google Accessibility account. I call them out, show how to do it accessibly, and Google deletes the tweet without acknowledgment while the Google Accessibility account never speaks of it.
• Google launches Designcember to promote its work on container queries and other technologies, but fails to support the developers and ensure the site is accessible. Which I call out. And for which my free labor is requested to QA fixes.
• Apple claims not once, not twice, but three times to have fixed CSS display property accessibility bugs, finally requiring a change in how Can I Use reports support.
• Google Chrome’s developer outreach site, Web.dev, shared how to build an accessible <tool-tip> custom element. Sadly, if you follow its advice you are guaranteed a SC 1.4.13 WCAG violation. Never mind translation issues, misunderstanding of how <abbr> is exposed, a conflation of accessible name and description, and an enforced inability to select text.
• Apple demonstrates Safari in visionOS by using a WCAG-failing site to show Apple’s bespoke low-contrast focus styles. For good measure, Apple also promotes problematic HTML structures.

Una entrevista a un experto sobre inteligencia artificial y accesibilidad

En Axi – Accessibility Intelligence, an interview with David O’Neill podemos leer:

There is a lot of optimism,  enthusiasm and trepidation on the interwebs about the transformative effect Artificial Intelligence (AI) will have on everything from marketing to the creative arts.

I often say that I am not an expert, but I know people who are. This is very much the case in terms of AI. Fortuitously, I have direct access to someone who is steeped in both accessibility knowledge and AI — or should I say Machine Learning (ML)? I am referring to David O’Neill, a Research Fellow at Vispero  (the parent company of TPGi). He has a low social media profile but has quietly been driving improvements in automated accessibility testing, and accessibility testing in general, for decades.

In the following interview, we will learn about David, and how he envisions AI/ML to be a force for major improvements in how we tackle the thorny problems of making technology work better for people — all people.

Y explica un caso concreto:

First off, it is a common misconception that AI/ML can solve all problems. That simply is not the case. The efficacy of AI/ML is a function of the use-case, availability of applicable models and tasks, and the volume/quality of available data for training and/or semantic search. So, evaluating these use-cases involves fitting it with proven ML tasks and inventorying your data.

Detecting Accessibility Issues is largely a classification task. Today, we perform accessibility issue detection in a highly deterministic manner.  We have functions that accept code as an input and use rule-based logic to assert a “pass or fail” outcome. We can say that the following code snippet is not accessible because it is an image with no ALT text attribute: <img src=”someimage.jpg”>. The lack of ALT text is easy to detect which allows us to classify the <img> element as “Inaccessible” with 100% confidence.

Can we do that specific test better with ML using a probabilistic model? And if so, is it worth it? The answer is probably not. We can train a classifier on a million code examples of images that are not accessible but have no guarantee that it will learn enough to predict “Inaccessible” on future examples with 100% accuracy. A simple rule of thumb is to use conventional deterministic algorithms whenever you can – provided the algorithms work, of course! The reasoning is simple: why trade in a sure, easy thing for a hard and costly result that only has some “probability” of being correct?

The key point here is that there is no benefit in using ML with fuzzy results and <100% accuracy on tasks that already have 100% accuracy with a traditionally programmed, non-learned algorithm.

Aplicaciones de la inteligencia artificial para la accesibilidad

En  Accessibility and Artificial Intelligence comentas algunas aplicaciones de la inteligencia artificial para la accesibilidad.

Básicamente, las dos situaciones que comenta son de sobra conocida: la generación automática de subtítulos en los vídeos y la generación automática de texto alternativo en las imágenes.

Los peligros de la inteligencia artificial para la accesibilidad web

En Five accessibility bugs GitHub Copilot offers to create explican los peligros de confiar en la inteligencia artificial en cuanto a la accesibilidad de una página web:

I like GitHub Copilot, at least for the narrow range of purposes I mentioned earlier. At the time I'm writing this up, there have been announcements about the next version of Copilot. Perhaps the next version will be fix some of these issues.

The danger here is that developers accept code suggestions, assuming that they're good. The 'wisdom of the crowd' could suggest that code based on millions of lines of code won't contain bugs. As demonstrated, this is not true.

Filtering the output, as it currently does to remove "offensive output", is possible. That probably wouldn't work better than current automatic accessibility testing and linting. So it would be an improvement, but not an absolute fix.

In my opinion, the responsibility always rests with the developer using the tool.

You shouldn't accept code suggestions from GitHub Copilot if you don't understand them. If you're expecting a certain type of suggestion, and you get one with extra attributes, you need to look them up. Don't use the code until you understand what every part of it does.

This could have a positive side. Maybe. It's possible that Copilot suggests accessibility considerations that people would otherwise have missed. Making people consider how to incorporate accessibility into their work normalizes it.

Adrian Roselli tampoco confía mucho en la inteligencia artificial para resolver los problemas de accesibilidad. En  No, ‘AI’ Will Not Fix Accessibility explica:

Large language models are habitual liars. Meanwhile, automated image descriptions aren’t much better. To give them the benefit of the doubt, perhaps these tools simply lack context.

As image tools get better at describing every detail of a picture, as language models do a better job of conveying an emoji-laden tweet in actual words, they are still not the authors of that content. They have no sense of why it was created. They cannot tell you that a series of vertical lines is meant to signify a wall in a meme.

Publicada la actualización de os títulos de la formación profesional del sistema educativo de Técnico Superior en Desarrollo de Aplicaciones Multiplataforma y Técnico Superior en Desarrollo de Aplicaciones Web

El 3 de junio de 2023 se publicó en el BOE el Real Decreto 405/2023, de 29 de mayo, por el que se actualizan los títulos de la formación profesional del sistema educativo de Técnico Superior en Desarrollo de Aplicaciones Multiplataforma y Técnico Superior en Desarrollo de Aplicaciones Web, de la familia profesional Informática y Comunicaciones, y se fijan sus enseñanzas mínimas.

Este Real Decreto modifica el Real Decreto 450/2010, de 16 de abril, por el que se establece el título de Técnico Superior en Desarrollo de Aplicaciones Multiplataforma y se fijan sus enseñanzas mínimas y el Real Decreto 686/2010, de 20 de mayo, por el que se establece el título de Técnico Superior en Desarrollo de Aplicaciones Web y se fijan sus enseñanzas mínimas..

En la definición de los contenidos del Módulo profesional Diseño de interfaces web aparece:

Diseño de webs accesibles:

− El Consorcio World Wide Web (W3C).

− Principios y Pautas de Accesibilidad al Contenido en la Web (WCAG).

− Criterios de conformidad. Niveles de conformidad.

− Técnicas para satisfacer los requisitos definidos en las WCAG.

− Prioridades. Puntos de verificación.

− Métodos para realizar revisiones preliminares y evaluaciones de adecuación o conformidad de documentos web.

− Herramientas de análisis de accesibilidad web.

− Chequeo de la accesibilidad web desde diferentes navegadores y dispositivos.

− Posicionamiento en buscadores. Mejora de la visibilidad de un sitio web en diferentes buscadores.

WAI-ARIA 1.2 ya es una recomendación

El 6 de junio de 2023 se publicó la versión definitiva de Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.2.

Las diferencias respecto a WAI-ARIA 1.1 están recogidas en B. Substantive changes since the WAI-ARIA 1.1 Recommendation.

Accesibilidad de EPUB

El pasado 25 de mayo de 2023 se publicó al mismo tiempo EPUB 3.3 y EPUB Accessibility 1.1, que define los requisitos de accesibilidad de EPUB.

En EPUB Accessibility 1.1 podemos leer:

The primary source for producing accessible web content is the W3C's Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) [wcag2], which establish benchmarks for accessible content. WCAG defines four high-level content principles — that content be perceivable, operable, understandable, and robust. These principles are also central to creating accessible EPUB publications, so it is no surprise that this specification builds on the extensive work done in WCAG.

Y después en 3.2 Relationship to WCAG dice:

WCAG [wcag2] and its associated techniques provide extensive coverage of issues and solutions for web content accessibility, covering everything from multimedia to interactive content to structured markup and more. They represent the foundation that this specification builds upon.

This specification does not repeat the requirements or techniques introduced in those documents, as it risks breaking compatibility between the two standards (e.g., putting guidance out of sync, or in conflict). At the same time, although this specification does not call out those requirements, it does not diminish their importance in creating EPUB publications that are accessible.

This specification instead defines how to apply WCAG to an EPUB publication — which is a collection of web documents as opposed to a single page — and adds an additional set of requirements. These requirements are no more or less important than those covered in WCAG; they are simply necessary to follow for EPUB publications. (Each requirement explains its relationship to WCAG in its respective section.)

The same is true of the techniques in the EPUB Accessibility Techniques document [epub-a11y-tech-11]. It provides coverage of techniques that are unique to EPUB publications, or that need clarification in the context of an EPUB publication. It does not mean that the rest of the WCAG techniques are not applicable.

As a result, although EPUB creators can read this section without deep knowledge of WCAG conformance, to implement the accessibility requirements of this specification requires an understanding of WCAG.

Because this specification adds requirements that are not a part of WCAG, an EPUB publication can conform to WCAG without conforming to this specification.

En EPUB 3.3 becomes a W3C Recommendation podemos leer:

Accessibility of EPUB publications was an essential part of the group’s activity. As a result, the EPUB Accessibility specification has been updated and, for the first time in the history of EPUB, is now an integral part of the EPUB Standard. Furthermore, the EPUB Accessibility specification is compatible with the European Accessibility Act whose influence will be significant on Digital Publishing in the years to come.