Understanding web accessibility and its drivers
Abstract
Access is what the web is 'about', it is the motivation behind its creation, and it is the rationale behind HTML. The desire to provide all users at CERN with the ability to access all documents was Tim Berners-Lee's primary goal, and this goal must also be carried through to equal access for all users. But this equality of access -- accessibility -- is difficult to quantify, define, or agree upon. In a constantly evolving field, understanding each other can be tricky; indeed, there are many different definitions in the literature, all with a different perspective. This makes it difficult for our community to interact, reach agreement, or share understanding. What is more, it makes it very difficult for those outside the web accessibility community to understand, plan, budget, enact policy, or conform to accessibility requirements and legislation when the community itself has so many, in some cases, conflicting definitions. We asked over 300 people, with an interest in accessibility, to discuss their views and definitions in an attempt to harmonise our understanding and support the expectations of users outside the community. We find that misunderstanding accessibility definitions, language, and terms might cause tension between different groups. That social, and not economic, aspects drive our perspectives of accessibility, and that definitions used by standards and regulatory bodies are most accepted - not those of individual experts. Forcing accessibility adoption does not encourage the acceptance of an accessibility ethos, but providing empirical evidence that accessibility benefits all, does. Finally, realistic and concise language was preferred when attempting to communicate, or define accessibility.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
One of web professionals' main motivations for considering web accessibility is that it enhances the overall quality of a product.
“One of web professionals' main motivations for considering web accessibility is that it enhances the overall quality of a product (Vollenwyder et al., 2019; Yesilada et al., 2012).”
From How compliance with web accessibility standards shapes the experiences of users with and without disabilities (2023) · cites this paper as Yesilada et al., 2012
Cites
Beyond Conformance: The Role of Accessibility Evaluation Methods
Brajnik, G. (2008) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-85200-1_9 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
Self-citationAbou-Zahra, S. (2008) · Human-Computer Interaction Series · doi:10.1007/978-1-84800-050-6_7 · Cited by 73 · cited 1× · see citing works
“There has been a significant amount of research on web accessibility evaluation [2], especially with regard to the automation of the evaluation process [11, 21].”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Tools for web accessibility evaluation
Abascal, J., Arrue, M., & Valencia, X. (2019) · Human–Computer Interaction Series · doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-7440-0_26 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
Vollenwyder, B., Petralito, S., Iten, G. H., Brühlmann, F., Opwis, K., & Mekler, E. D. (2023) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2022.102956 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Othman, A., Dhouib, A., & Nasser Al Jabor, A. (2023) · Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments · doi:10.1145/3594806.3596542 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Schmutz, S., Sonderegger, A., & Sauer, J. (2016) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/0018720816640962 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Web accessibility in Turkey: awareness, understanding and practices of user experience professionals
Inal, Y., Rızvanoğlu, K., & Yesilada, Y. (2019) · Universal Access in the Information Society · doi:10.1007/s10209-017-0603-3 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Salient beliefs influencing the intention to consider Web Accessibility
Vollenwyder, B., Iten, G. H., Brühlmann, F., Opwis, K., & Mekler, E. D. (2019) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.11.016 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
AlMeraj, Z., Alhuwail, D., Qadri, R., Shama, S., & Crabb, M. (2024) · Universal Access in the Information Society · doi:10.1007/s10209-023-00980-5 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
- Authors
- Yesilada, Y., Brajnik, G., Vigo, M., & Harper, S.
- Affiliations
- Middle East Technical University, Northern Cyprus Campus, Mersin, Turkey
- University of Udine (IT)
- University of Manchester (GB)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2012-04-16
- Pages
- 1-9
- OpenAlex
- W2159330326
- Cited by
- 79
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 3.75
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility (W4A) (publishedVersion)
- Institutional Research Information System (University of Udine) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Rights and Representation
- Keywords
- web accessibility, accessibility standards, accessibility legislation, Tim Berners-Lee, HTML, equal access
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review