Accessibility Audit Report
Return to Accessibility General
Department for Work and Pensions of the Government of the United Kingdom, re: www.disability.gov.uk
Date: 06/03/2002
Article
0. Status of Document
0.1 This document is the intellectual property of the Department for Work and Pensions of the Government of the United Kingdom.
0.2 Its distribution is entirely at the discretion of the Department. humanITy has retained one digital copy for its archive as a matter of record and security but undertakes not to distribute this to any other party than the Department in the case of loss of part or all of the initial submission.
0.3 In compiling this Report humanITy consulted Ethical Media to undertake some technical testing but the contents and conclusions of this Report are the sole responsibility of humanITy.
1. General
1.1 The site was generally clear and presentable and provided the keyboard navigation which the very helpful "Help" Section (10) promised.
1.2 We understand the need to adhere to the World Wide Web Consortium (w3.org) Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) but it is our experience that these are somewhat heavily oriented towards the needs of blind and visually impaired people. On that count, we noted with approbation:
- Print size customisation facility (though we would recommend a default print size of 12-point rather than 10-point)
- Right hand unjustified
- Caption for Home page picture
- Keyboard navigation.
Our system (PC/Microsoft Office bundle), however, was unable to adjust the font. As the default is Arial this is only a minor point.
1.3 Although the site is fundamentally acceptable, designers may wish to bear in mind that the WAI has been trying to make it clear that good design need not be boring. This site contains a degree of overkill with total reliance upon text. In any modification, designers should consider including graphics with "Alt tag" descriptions.
1.4 In any re-design we would recommend that information be laid on colour-coded panels so that there is a consistent look-and-feel. People with learning difficulties also need a degree of help with understanding what is really important and what is tangential. We suggest more little summaries.
1.5 In any future design we would recommend the optional use of a navigation option which allows use by telephone without a screen by presenting pages with no more than nine links per page. You may also want to consider the further option of showing available data in arrays of two or four so that a switch can be more easily used.
1.6 We recommend that in any re-design more care be taken to distinguish between the present and the past. A good example of this is the DRTF, which is an interesting piece of history but not very relevant now.
1.7 Our own brief look at the facility has not convinced us that the feedback form mechanism is adequate. It appears that the system will accept individual subscription ISP account e-mails but not free web-based e-mail accounts. We may be wrong in this but it needs to be checked with a wider variety of accounts than that at our disposal; we recommend that the feedback facility be tried with three subscription ISPs and three free web-based e-mail systems.
2. Technical
2.1 We confirm that this site meets all the specifications for w3.org/wai/WCAG Version 1.0 levels One and Two and with the exception of the comment below, Level three.
The one area of non-compliance is in respect of the Home Page where there is not enough white space between the list of links in the navigation area in the right-hand column. The designers should use additional line breaks or other simple formatting devices to facilitate easier access by users with screen magnification and synthetic speech packages.
2.2 We confirm that with the exception cited above, this site meets the Bobby requirements.
2.3 Screen reader Access. The site was examined under Jaws 4.0, the current market leader in screen reader packages.
- Keyboard shortcuts. Because many users will have shortcuts inbuilt into such packages as Jaws, it is important to provide a simple on/off button for the use of the client side scripts as there may be conflict with user accessibility software.
- There is a problem with the "Quick Navigation Link" which, through the use of the tab key, takes the user to the last hyperlink before the navigation area; what it should do is take the user to a spot directly above the navigation area and prompt that the navigation facility is now available.
- Advanced search page. For consistency as well as usability, drop down lists should be used in any re-design instead of radio buttons. Put each field on a separate line and standardise. For ease of use the search button should be both at the top and the bottom of the form. In a re-design this should be done on all forms so that after a review of options the user can press 'Enter'.
2.4 We also confirm that our remarks in Section 1. are mostly a matter of enhancement of and are not breaches of WAI/Bobby requirements.
3. Conclusion
3.1 We regard the site as a thorough and genuine attempt to meet the needs of disabled people and confirm that the standard met is very high and of value to other designers but we would urge a degree of alternative presentation and a higher degree of aesthetic sensibility and concern for users who might benefit from colour and graphics.
Kevin Carey
Director, humanITy