Advertisement

Evaluating Groupware Accessibility

  • John G. Schoeberlein
  • Yuanqiong (Kathy) Wang
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5616)

Abstract

Accessibility has been one of the biggest problems that people with disabilities face in the work place, due to today’s rapid change in computer technology. This paper presents the evaluation of several console-based and web-based groupware applications including Outlook, AIM, Google Blog, and Group System’s ThinkTank in terms of their accessibility. These applications were evaluated for accessibility based on various characteristics of the applications such as accessible front-end, hierarchy or list structures, input support, output support; screen reader adaptability; and keyboard access. Additionally, web-based groupware applications were evaluated using Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) and U.S. Government’s Section 508 guidelines. Fujitsu’s Web Accessibility Inspector tool was also utilized to help evaluate the web-based applications. It is found that groupware applications have very limited accessibility through the support of keyboard access. Additional audio support and flattened hierarchies should be considered, to enable some persons with disabilities easy access to groupware applications. Future research should include persons with disabilities in evaluating groupware applications, to determine preferences. Since many groupware applications provide Application Program Interfaces (API), custom front-ends should be developed to include audio content and to flatten hierarchies and lists.

Keywords

CSCW Groupware accessibility blind visually impaired dyslexia user Interface and assistive technology 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
  2. 2.
    AIM Object Library, http://dev.aol.com/aim
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
    Bell Craft DeskBot, www.bellcraft.com/deskbot
  5. 5.
    Bishup, J., Danzfuss, T., Klazar, R., Rama, J., Tseoali, T.: Nomad – Collaborative groupware for casually-connected communities. Technical Report, Polelo Research Group, University of Pretoria (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ellis, C.A., Gibbs, S.J., Reim, G.L.: Groupware: Some issues and experiences. Communications of the ACM 34(1), 680–689 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
  10. 10.
  11. 11.
  12. 12.
    GroupSystems ThinkTank, http://www.groupsystems.com/thinktank
  13. 13.
    GroupSystems ThinkTank templates, http://www.groupsystems.com/using-thinktank-emplates
  14. 14.
    Hampel, T., Keil-Slawik, R., Claassen, B.G., Plohmann, F., Reimann, C.: Pragmatic Solutions for Better Integration of the Visually Impaired in Virtual Communities. In: Proceedings GROUP 1999, pp. 258–266. Phoenix, AR (1999)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Luk, R., Yeung, D., Lu, O., Leung, E., Li, S.Y., Leung, F.: Digital Library Access for Chinese Visually Impaired. In: ACM 2000, pp. 244–245 (2000)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
  18. 18.
    Takagi, H., Asakawa, C., Itoh, T.: Non-Visual Groupware Client: Notes Reader. In: Proceedings of Center on Disability Technology and Persons with Disabilities Conference, California State University (2000)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Thiessen, P., Chen, C.: Ajax Live Regions: Chat as a Case Example. In: Proceedings of the 2007 International World Wide Web Conference, W4A (2007)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tse, E., Shen, C., Greenberg, S., Forlines, C.: How Pairs Interact Over a Multimodal Digital Table. In: Proceedings CHI 2007, pp. 216–218. ACM Press, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
  22. 22.
  23. 23.
    W3C Roadmap for Accessible Rich Internet Applications. WAI-ARIA Roadmap, http://www.w3.org/TR/aria-roadmap
  24. 24.
    W3C HTML techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0., http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/
  25. 25.
    W3C Comparison of WCAG 1.0 Checkpoints to WCAG 2.0, http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-WCAG20-20060427/appendixD.html
  26. 26.
    W3C Complete List of Web Accessibility Evaluation Tools, http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/tools/complete
  27. 27.
    Watanabe, M., Okano, A., Asano, Y., Ogawa, K.: VoiceBlog: Universally Designed Voice Browser. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 23(1-2), 95–113 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Watters, P., Araujo, A., Hezart, A., Naik, S.: Accessibility Solutions for Visually Impaired Users of Web Discussion Boards. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Information Technology and Applications (2005)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
  30. 30.
    Winberg, F., Bowers, J.: Assembling the Senses: Towards the Design of Cooperative Interfaces for Visually impaired Users. In: Proceedings of CSCW 2004, Chicago, IL, pp. 332–341 (2004)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Woodfine, B.P., Nunes, M.B., Wright, D.J.: Text-based synchronous e-learning and dyslexia: Not necessarily the perfect match! Computers and Education 50(3), 703–717 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • John G. Schoeberlein
    • 1
  • Yuanqiong (Kathy) Wang
    • 1
  1. 1.Towson UniversityMarylandUSA

Personalised recommendations