An Investigation into the Accessibility of Web based Manifesto information of parties standing in the Scottish Parliament Elections 2003.
Authors: David Sloan, Digital Media Access Group, University of Dundee, and Martin Sloan, Brodies, Edinburgh
Publication Date: 24 April 2003
Summary of Findings (separate page)
More information on web accessibility
Legislation relating to accessibility of polling stations has been introduced to help many more disabled voters to exercise their democratic right by voting in the elections for the 2003 Scottish Parliament. E-government is often suggested as a way of making democracy more accessible to disabled and older members of society. But how do the web sites of Scottish political parties fare for accessibility to disabled web users? Do these sites make information accessible so that voters can make an informed choice between parties when they vote?
Each political party standing for the 2003 Scottish Parliament maintains a party web site. These web sites are potentially very useful sources of information for the electorate, not least as a place to find out about party policy via an on-line Manifesto. In particular, the web is potentially the easiest way for many disabled people (a group where turnout at elections has been quoted as historically more than ten per cent below the rest of the population 1) to independently access information relating to the election, information that allows them to analyse party policy and make an informed decision on likely voting intentions.
The Representation of The People Act 2000 2, introduced in time for last year's General Election, made radical reforms to the voting procedure for disabled people. This Act requires every polling station to have large print ballot papers on display and a device to allow blind and partially sighted voters to vote independently. In addition, the option to vote with the assistance of a companion has now been extended to any person who is blind or has a physical incapacity or an inability to read. However, whilst these measures have allowed more disabled people to exercise their right to vote they are of little use if a disabled person cannot find out about a particular party's Manifesto pledges.
While there is currently a separate issue relating to wealth and access to Internet technology for many groups of society, the provision of accessible web sites is in the authors' opinion an efficient and flexible way of making election-related information available to a wide audience, regardless of disability.
People who may have difficulty or find it impossible to access information on the web include people who:
In many cases, technology exists to enable access, such as screen readers that can covert text into speech for blind people, Braille displays, screen magnification software and alternative input devices that can replace the keyboard or mouse.
A well-designed web site will cater for a wide range of access needs, and will work well with these assistive technologies. For example, a Manifesto presented as an accessible web page can also be read out by a screen reader or presented as Braille by a Braille display directly to blind Web surfers, resulting in an efficient and flexible presentation of information, saving disabled web users from having to order, or even purchase, alternative versions.
It should be noted that there is a related economic issue here, in that assistive technology tends to be expensive, while many disabled people are comparatively disadvantaged economically, and may not be able to afford the cost of a computer plus appropriate technology. This issue is obviously extremely significant in the subject of accessibility of web based information, but is beyond the scope of this review.
There has been a significant amount of research into the area of web accessibility 3, resulting in the availability of many useful guidelines, tools and other resources to help web site designers develop web sites accessible to the widest possible audience. Unfortunately, awareness of these resources is still limited, and knowledge amongst designers in how to effectively design with accessibility in mind is not as widespread as it could be. Unfortunately, there is also a viewpoint held by some that accessible design is incompatible with other goals, such as a visually stunning web site, with complex functionality and interactivity, while others feel that accessible design is either too difficult, too expensive, or an inefficient use of time.
These arguments can be balanced by considering that, as with other products, designing a web site accessible to a diverse range of people often benefits everyone - a web site that is easier and faster to use than its rivals is undoubtedly a significant asset.
In addition to the commercial benefits, an accessible web site is also likely to be required under Part III of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (the DDA) 4. Under s.19 of this Act, service providers are obliged not to discriminate against disabled people in the provision of a service and to make "reasonable adjustments" to any services which a disabled person might find unreasonably difficult to use as a result of his or her disability.
Although the Act does not stipulate that web sites are covered by the obligations, it does give the example of "access to and use of an information service", which is likely to include web sites, being in essence sources of information. The position with e-commerce sites is arguably even more clear cut, with the web site clearly being a service. A recent revision of the Code of Practice on the Provision of Goods Facilities and Services 5, which accompanies Part III of the Act, has for the first time included a web site within the examples of services which will be subject to the Act. The Code of Practice, whilst not an authoritative statement of the law, is designed to give guidance to both service providers and disabled people as to what is and what is not covered by the Act. Further, in hearing a case brought under the DDA, the Court has a duty to consult the Code of Practice where it is deemed relevant.
The argument for accessible web sites is further strengthened by recent experiences in Australia, where in 2000 the Sydney Olympic Games organising committee was ordered to pay damages to a visually impaired man who was unable to access the main Olympic Games web site. Despite there being no explicit requirement for web sites to be made accessible and the site in question only offering information and news on the games, the Human Rights & Equal Opportunities Commission held that the committee were offering a service to the public 6. As such, there was therefore a legal requirement on the organising committee to provide a web site accessible to disabled visitors.
The DDA closely mirrors the equivalent Australian legislation and provides a strong indication on how it will be interpreted by the courts. Although no legal action has yet been brought against a UK service provider because its web site is inaccessible to disabled people, in light of such a clear argument, it is hard to imagine that a court in the UK would come to different decision.
The parties chosen for this review were those linked from the BBC News web site's Vote Scotland 2003 section 7.
The parties reviewed were:
It should be stressed that the omission of any party's web site from this review should not be interpreted as a political statement by the authors, who have no political affiliations.
A selection of pages from each party's site was chosen. These were:
The pages were accessed during the period 11-17th April, and consequently any changes to the pages made after that time are not taken into account.
The methodology was developed with the aim of quickly gaining an impression of accessibility of the sites chosen, and did not aim to uncover all potential accessibility problems present.
To obtain an initial overview of general accessibility levels, the Home page of each site was checked with the 'Cynthia Says' accessibility checking tool 8. This tool automatically inspects the HTML code of a web page for potential accessibility problems - while it cannot report every potential problem, it does detect certain key features, such as the presence of text alternatives for graphics, and gives a useful indication as to whether a site is likely to present some people with accessibility problems.
Following this, each site was viewed in a variety of browsers, with the aim of judging compliance with a set of accessibility guidelines. The following browsers were used to assess the pages for potential accessibility problems:
Using these browsers, an assessment was made of the pages' compliance with the following accessibility rules of thumb. These, and the 'Cynthia Says' checking tool, are based on the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)'s Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 9:
NB The WCAG, first published on 5th May 1999, one day before the first ever Scottish Parliament elections, are the most widely recognised and accepted benchmark for web accessibility. The 14 guidelines are subdivided into 65 prioritised checkpoints, based on the significance of the related accessibility barrier to which they refer. In this review, using a subset of these guidelines allowed a faster assessment of the accessibility of the web pages in question. Therefore this report does not attempt to describe all accessibility problems present in each party's site.
When checked with the 'Cynthia Says' accessibility checking tool, using the 'WCAG Priority One' setting to check for only the most significant accessibility problems, the following web sites failed the check:
This indicates that the above sites are likely to present significant accessibility problems to some groups of disabled web users. It should also be noted that sites that did not fail the check may still have accessibility problems - the tool could only automatically check for a small subset of all accessibility guidelines.
Following this check, each party's site was reviewed in more detail:
http://www.scottishtories.org.uk
Generally pages could be understood when listened to in Home Page Reader, but some images were missing alternative text, potentially confusing users of other screen reading technology.
It was possible to access the Manifesto and its sections using the keyboard - access to the Manifesto required only 4 key presses. Some other features such as the menu allowing access to information about a specific constituency could only be accessed using the mouse.
Pages were readable and understandable when viewed in monochrome.
Links to the Manifesto were clearly labelled; however some other links on the site were found that did clearly indicate their destination.
Some text on the site could be enlarged; but the size of the text forming the site navigation on the left hand side of pages could not be changed.
The Manifesto information was provided in HTML format, although the HTML did not validate to an accepted standard, when checked using the W3C Validation Service.
http://www.scottishgreens.org.uk
Several images lacked text alternatives, including the navigation bar links and the image at the top of the Home page containing the party name. This meant that browsing with Home Page Reader and Lynx was significantly more difficult than need have been.
The Manifesto was accessible using the keyboard for access, but 26 key presses were required to access the Manifesto. Navigation to the Manifesto was relatively straightforward.
Contrast between text and background colours was quite low, potentially limiting readability.
Some text on the site could be enlarged; but not the text forming the site navigation on the left hand side of pages.
The Manifesto information was provided in HTML format, although the HTML did not validate to an accepted standard.
Main site: http://www.scottishlabour.org.uk
Manifesto site: http://www.justthebeginning.org
Encouragingly a "Disability Access" link was provided on the Home page, linking to a page giving information about the site's accessibility to disabled visitors. The information on this page suggested that several steps had been taken to ensure the site "works well in text browsers" and "fits criteria of people with visual impairment". Unfortunately, despite this, many significant accessibility problems were found, which are likely to make access very difficult to blind, visually impaired and other disabled users.
Navigation links on the main site were presented as graphics of text that was very difficult to read, and this text could not be enlarged.
Most graphics were provided with text alternatives; however, in many cases these were not appropriate and would likely result in significant frustration for screen reader users. For example, many decorative graphics were given alternative text "*" - meaning that when reading the page with a series of these graphics, Home Page Reader spoke "asterisk", "asterisk", "asterisk", "asterisk", when encountering these images.
Access to the party's Manifesto required navigating via an intermediary page to a separate Manifesto web site. This site was composed of a complex frame-set, and the Manifesto itself was only offered in PDF format, not in HTML.
It was possible to navigate to the Manifesto using the keyboard, but to access the PDF version required 79 key presses.
Alternative versions of the Manifesto were offered, in Braille and audio, but required users to contact the party to order these. Using Lynx, it was not possible to access the Manifesto site from the main site, due to the JavaScript technology used to create the link to the Manifesto site.
The main site was composed of frames - i.e. the main page was in fact composed of two sub-pages, displayed together by the browser to give the impression of one page. Using frames causes potential accessibility problems for browsers that do not support them, as well as some assistive technologies that can have difficulty in detecting changes in content of frames.
The manifesto was presented in HTML format - although not in an accepted standard of HTML. but the layout of the site meant that navigation was often inefficient - using the keyboard, 28 key presses were required in order to access the first link to the Manifesto. The layout of the site, and the use of one long page for the Manifesto meant that information flow was also unexpected when the site was spoken by Home Page Reader, making information comprehension particularly difficult.
Some graphics were not provided with appropriate alternative text. Most text could be enlarged to improve readability, but some text remained potentially difficult to read.
Main site: http://www.snp.org
Manifesto site: http://www.releaseourpotential.com
The main site used frames - in this case, the main page was composed of four sub-pages, displayed together by the browser to give the impression of one page. As with other party sites using frames, there are potential accessibility problems for browsers that do not support them, as well as some assistive technologies that can have difficulty in detecting changes in content of frames.
The Manifesto was provided on a separate web site, with a link from the main Home page. It was possible to navigate to the Manifesto using the keyboard, and required only 8 key presses to access the main Flash version - the Flash Manifesto was also keyboard navigable.
Some graphics on the main site were lacking appropriate alternative text, making comprehension of the site very difficult for screen reader users. Interestingly, a separate 'text' version of the SNP site was provided; presumably as an effort to improve accessibility. Pages of this version of the site displayed a verification icon from the 'Bobby' accessibility-checking tool, and was the only site of those tested that included some evidence that external accessibility validation had been carried out. Despite this, however, the text only site did not provide a link to the Manifesto site.
Some text on the site could not be enlarged, and could present significant readability problems to some site users.
When using Home Page Reader access could not be gained to the Manifesto site, although when Lynx was used to access the Manifesto site, an accessible version of the Manifesto was provided. The main Manifesto site was presented as animated content, using Macromedia Flash rather than HTML. Although this meant that the Manifesto was presented as rich audio-visual content, this may cause many users accessibility problems - even if the Flash content has been made as accessible as possible through the use of recently introduced accessibility features, there was no option to view an alternative HTML version of the Manifesto for users who cannot access Flash content.
Paradoxically, as seen when using Lynx, a text based HTML version of the Manifesto did exist, but unfortunately was only automatically offered to certain browsers. So for example a blind user accessing the site with Internet Explorer and a screen reader may only be offered the Flash version.
It was noted that the SNP Manifesto was offered in Braille and audio formats, but to obtain these required telephone ordering, and each format cost £4.50.
http://www.peoples-alliance.org.uk
Significant difficulty was encountered in accessing this site using Lynx and Home Page Reader. Graphics were not given text alternatives, making navigation and comprehension of information very difficult.
Keyboard access through the site was made virtually impossible due to the animation at the top of the Home page - the reviewers found it impossible to bypass this in order to access the site navigation. Thus, it was not possible for users who cannot use a mouse to navigate to the Manifesto.
The Manifesto was additionally provided only in PDF format, and was not available in HTML.
http://www.scottishsocialistparty.org
Access to the party's Manifesto was straightforward, with a clear link on the Home page. Using Home Page Reader, the manner in which link text was read out was slightly confusing, but did not significantly hinder access.
The Manifesto was keyboard accessible, but did require at best 19 key presses in order to access it.
Graphics were all provided with appropriate text alternatives, and some, but not all, text could be enlarged - the small text size of the Manifesto could not be changed using Internet Explorer's text size options.
The faded grey text used to provide captions for some images could present readability problems, but most text was appropriately readable.
The Manifesto was presented in accessible HTML format, and the HTML validated to the XHTML 1.0 standard, significantly improving the potential for the site to be accessible in a wide range of browsers.
http://www.ukip-in-scotland.org
To gain access to the Manifesto, users first had to navigate past an introductory screen in order to get to the Home, where a link to the Manifesto was provided. The site used frames - in this case, the Home page was composed of two frames, and the Manifesto section was comprised of three frames. As with other party sites using frames, there are potential accessibility problems for browsers that do not support them, as well as some assistive technologies that can have difficulty in detecting changes in content of frames.
The site presented information, including the Manifesto in simple HTML text, although the HTML could not be validated against accepted standards. It was possible to adjust the appearance of most text other than the navigation links, and browsing in monochrome did not prevent access to or understanding of information.
Keyboard access to the Manifesto was possible, and the Manifesto could be accessed directly in 8 key presses, although elsewhere in the site, the 'Select Your Region' feature used a menu that could only be activated using the mouse.
Despite the increasingly high profile of web accessibility as an essential aspect of web design, the legal implications relating to potential discrimination, and the obvious advantages to parties who provide information through an accessible web site, the findings of this review were very disappointing. Evidence suggests that access to online Manifestos will be at best frustrating and time consuming, and at worst impossible for many disabled people, including blind and visually impaired people, people with motor impairments, and also people with dyslexia.
The lack of thought given to keyboard accessibility - essential for blind web users as well as anyone with an impairment that prevents them from using a mouse - was particularly disappointing. Some sites, most notably Labour, required an excessive amount of key presses in order to access the Manifesto, and the Peoples' Alliance Manifesto was inaccessible to keyboard users. Other sites allowed efficient keyboard access to the Manifesto, but other features could only be operated using the mouse. Examples included navigation menus on both the Conservative and UK Independence Party sites.
For some party sites, there was little evidence to suggest that disabled users had been considered during the design and testing process. Examples were the missing or inappropriate text alternatives to graphics of many sites, while the layout of the Liberal Democrats' site, with key links and information on the right hand side of pages meant that browsing using a screen reader would be particularly inefficient and frustrating.
The reliance on providing a full Manifesto only in Portable Document Format (PDF) format was also a potential accessibility problem. A Manifesto presented in well written HTML web pages should be easily and immediately accessible to people using a variety of browsers and assistive technologies. To access, read and print PDF documents requires additional separate software. Additionally, the nature of this file format means that to allow documents in this format to be readable by screen readers may require a blind user to convert the document into an accessible text version, depending on how the PDF was created. At best, additional effort may be required for many to be able to read PDF files; at worst they may be inaccessible to some blind web users.
NB: There is certainly a role for providing a Manifesto document in PDF form, as well as HTML web pages, where the PDF is intended for printing the document out for off-line reading. But for on-line viewing, HTML has the advantage of being more immediately accessible to a wider audience.
Another disappointing finding was that while some sites, notably those of Scottish Labour and SNP, provided evidence that accessibility had been considered, there was frustration that this did not translate into an optimally accessible web site.
The picture is not, however, completely bleak. The Manifesto of the Scottish Socialist Party was relatively straightforward to access, even when using Home Page Reader and Lynx, and the SSP's web site was particularly commendable in that it validated to an accepted HTML standard: XHTML 1.0 Transitional. The simple layout and design of the SSP site helped to ensure improved access to the Manifesto. This greatly increases the chance that the site will be readable in the widest range of browsers and assistive technologies.
What is also encouraging is that for all sites, only a small amount of effort is required to significantly improve accessibility. By providing the Manifesto in valid HTML, ensuring that information in graphic and animated form is also provided in text form, and ensuring that navigation to the Manifesto is as efficient as possible when using the keyboard, accessibility should be dramatically improved for many users.
As well as designing to accepted accessibility guidelines, involvement of disabled web users is also recommended, in order to ensure that sites are as easy to use as possible by as many people as possible.
Commendably, steps have been taken to ensure that the physical process of voting in the 2003 elections to the Scottish Parliament will be made more accessible than ever before to the electorate, regardless of disability. Unfortunately, the accessibility of web based party policy information allowing voters to make an informed choice remains disappointingly low, with accessibility of party information on the web very inconsistent. Many disabled voters may be severely compromised in their ability to use on-line Manifesto pledges to choose between parties.
Whether attitudes of a political party towards accessibility on the web match party attitudes towards accessibility of society is not an issue on which the authors can comment. It is however hoped that parties seize the initiative to use the web as an economical, efficient and accessible way of stating their case for election to the widest possible audience.
David Sloan is Research Co-ordinator of the Digital Media Access Group, a research and consultancy group based in the Division of Applied Computing at the University of Dundee. David has advised many clients on the accessibility of educational, commercial and public sector web sites, and has also spoken on the subject at a number of conferences in the UK and beyond. He is also studying for a PhD, looking at aspects of how web accessibility can be improved for disabled web users.
Martin Sloan is a Trainee solicitor with Edinburgh commercial law firm Brodies, and is one of the UK's leading authorities on Web Accessibility and the law. Following his Honours Dissertation on Web Accessibility and the DDA, Martin has written for several leading UK law journals and has spoken at conferences organised by the RNIB and the University of Edinburgh. Martin was supported in his original research by the Digital Media Access Group at the University of Dundee and periodically writes for their Web site. Martin also runs a Web site containing information on Web Accessibility and the law in the UK at http://www.web-access.org.uk.
Web Accessibility for People with Disabilities - Paciello, M (2000), CMP Books. ISBN 1-929629 - 08-7
Constructing Accessible Web Sites - Thatcher, J., Waddell, C., Henry, S., Swierenga, S., Urban, M., Burks, M., Regan, B. and Bohman, P. (2002), Glasshaus. ISBN 1904151000
Building Accessible Web Sites - Clark, J (2002), New Riders. ISBN 073571150X
© David Sloan and Martin Sloan 2003