Mary Zajicek
ABSTRACT
Web 2.0 has initiated a new age of Web interaction. Countless everyday activities such as seeking information, shopping, filling in forms and making appointments can be done effectively and often more cheaply on the Web. However many of the new community sites, and other Web 2.0 sites, do not promote accessibility in terms of inclusivity. They are built for, and are of most benefit to, young socially integrated people who own their own laptop and live in a world of readily available radio LAN and fast access broadband. However many older or disabled people are living on low budgets and do not have access to such things.
Those for whom the Web is inaccessible for whatever reason will become increasingly excluded from mainstream life if it is not made accessible to them. This paper argues for a holistic approach to accessibly which addresses all aspects of the user's life. It tracks the impact of the advent of Web 2.0 on Web accessibility in its widest sense. It starts with a definition of accessibility, which in this context means apart from physical access, inclusion and acceptability. Through the use of case studies it examines worrying trends brought about by Web 2.0, and positive signs of improvement in accessibility, due to Web 2.0.
- Ajax Matters http://www.ajaxmatters.com/ (last accessed 8-4-7)Google Scholar
- Audyssey Games http://www.audyssey.org/ (last accessed 10-4-7)Google Scholar
- Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-AUTOOLS/ (last accessed 8-4-7)Google Scholar
- Ball, Liz - Access 2.0 interview http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/access20/2007/01/post_2.shtml (last accessed 12-4-7)British Computer Association of the Blind (BCAB) http://www.bcab.org.uk/ (last accessed 9-4-7)Google Scholar
- British Computer Association for the Blind (BCAB) http://www.bcab.org.uk/ (last accessed 9-4-7)Google Scholar
- Davis, F. D. (1993) User acceptance of information technology: system characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38, 475--487. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Facebook http://www.facebook.com (Last accessed 12-4-7)Google Scholar
- Keith, J., Hijax: Progressive Enhancement with Ajax, Proceedings of X Tech 2006, Building Web 2.0, http://xtech06.usefulinc.com/schedule/paper/29 (last accessed 8-4-7)Google Scholar
- Morrissey, W., Zajicek, M., 2001, 'Remembering how to use the Internet: An investigation into the effectiveness of VoiceHelp for older adults', Proc. HCI International'2001, pp 700--704Google Scholar
- Ouch! http://www.bbc.co.uk/ouch/about/ (last accessed 12-4-7)Google Scholar
- Parikh, T., Chavan, A., Syal, P., Arora, S., Design Studies for a Financial Management System for Micro-credit Groups in Rural India, Proceedings of Computers and Universal Usability CUU 2003, Vancouver. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Radar The Disability Network http://www.radar.org.uk/ (last accessed 9-4-7) Watson Léone Interview for Access 2.0 Accessible Digital Life http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/access20/2006/11/a_view_from_the_trenches.shtml (last accessed 12-4-7)Google Scholar
- Skype http://www.skype.com/ (last accessed 8-4-7)Google Scholar
- Watson, L., http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/access20/2006/11/a_view_from_the_trenches.shtml (last accessed 12-4-7)Google Scholar
- Web Access Initiative www.w3.org/WAI/ (last accessed 8-4-7)Google Scholar
- Web Content Accessibility Guidelines http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/ (last accessed 8-4-7)Google Scholar
- Zajicek M., Arnold B., 1999, 'The 'Technology Push' and the User Tailored Information Environment', 5th European Research Consortium for Informatics and Mathematics (ERCIM) Workshop 'User Interfaces for All' GMD Report 74, Dagstuhl, Germany, pp 5--12Google Scholar
- Zajicek M. & Hall, S., 2000, 'Solutions for elderly visually impaired people using the Internet', In S. McDonald, Y. Waern, G. Cockton (eds) People and Computers XIV - Usability or Else!, Proceedings of HCI 2000, pp 299--307Google Scholar
- Zajicek M., Wales, R., Lee, A., 2003 'Towards VoiceXML Dialogue Design for Older Adults', In Palanque P., Johnson P., O'Neill E (eds) Design for Society. Proceedings of HCI 2003, pp 327--338Google Scholar
- Zone BBS http://www.zonebbs.com/ (last accessed 13-4-7)Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Web 2.0: hype or happiness?
Recommendations
Web accessibility for older users: successes and opportunities (keynote)
W4A '09: Proceedings of the 2009 International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibililty (W4A)Web accessibility for older users -- are we there yet? We understand many of the needs, however there are some gaps in our knowledge and much integration and adoption still required.
The Web Accessibility Initiative: Ageing Education and Harmonisation (...
Towards More Universal Wayfinding Technologies: Navigation Preferences Across Disabilities
CHI '20: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsAccessibility researchers have been studying wayfinding technologies for people with disabilities for decades, typically focusing on solutions within disability populations - for example, technologies to support blind navigation. Yet, we know little ...
Enabling an accessible web 2.0
W4A '07: Proceedings of the 2007 international cross-disciplinary conference on Web accessibility (W4A)The next generation of the Web is relying on new technologies to build rich interfaces and applications which enable community, collaboration, social networking and enhanced interactions. This has implication for people with disabilities who have come ...
Reviews
Ian Ruthven
The characteristic feature of Web 2.0 applications is to encourage community interaction by facilitating collaboration and sharing between users. In this short paper, an abstract for a keynote presentation, Zajicek considers the degree to which this true. Are Web 2.0 applications supporting some communities, those comprised of young, affluent, socially integrated people, at the expense of other communities, particularly the elderly, visually impaired, or poor__?__ The paper raises some interesting insights. The move toward more video-based presentation, for example, may exclude deaf or blind Web users, and the increased use of dynamic presentations can cause problems for screen readers used by visually impaired users. However, other claims seem far weaker and anecdotal. It is particularly not clear, in several cases, what concept of Web 2.0 is being considered, with some discussions centered on technology that clearly predates Web 2.0. The keynote address that inspired this paper may have been interesting and wide-ranging, but the paper itself feels rambling and inconclusive. Online Computing Reviews Service
Access critical reviews of Computing literature here
Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.
Comments