Preiser W., Smith K.H. Universal Design Handbook
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
32.8 PUBLIC SPACES, PRIVATE SPACES, PRODUCTS, AND TECHNOLOGIES
32.4 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN UNIVERSAL DESIGN
AND ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY
The distinction between universal design and assistive technology depends on both the user and the
application. Depending on the situation, the same device can be perceived differently. For example,
when a magnifying lens is used for examining tiny objects such as a splinter, it is considered a tool;
when the lens is used by someone to read the newspaper, it is called assistive technology. When
television headphones are used by one member of a household to watch a show without disturbing
others, they are dubbed a clever gadget; when those headphones are used by an individual who has
impaired hearing, they are considered assistive technology. When an electric cart is used by a golfer,
it is considered sports equipment; when an electric scooter is used by an individual with limited
stamina, it is perceived to be assistive technology.
Ron Mace discussed the distinctions between assistive technology and universal design at the
conference Designing for the 21st Century (Mace, 1998). Using both his personal and professional
experience, he described many examples of personal equipment that some people need, such as
eyeglasses and portable oxygen tanks, which will never be attractive to individuals who do not
need them.
However, products sometimes move across the dividing line from assistive technology to univer-
sal design and become appealing to a larger number of users. Mace mentioned a number of devices
that had crossed this line, such as TV headphones and extra large toilet stalls. Other products that
started as accessible and became mainstream include the following:
• OXO Good Grips. The OXO Good Grips line of kitchen utensils was conceived when founder Sam
Farber retired from the kitchenware business he founded (Copco) and moved to France with his
wife, Betsey. While cooking, Betsey noticed that using the kitchen utensils aggravated the pain of
the arthritis in her hands. This motivated Sam to develop better handles for these tools and come
out of retirement to start a new company, OXO International. Betsey, a designer, became OXO’s
director of design. The handle designs were not sold as assistive technology but were introduced
without promotion as standard kitchen products. Today, the popular soft, rounded Good Grips
handles can be seen on OXO products ranging from kitchen peelers to garden trowels and have
inspired many imitators. (For more information, see Mueller, 1997.)
• Voice recognition technology. Early military research in voice recognition technology was applied
to create some of the first systems used by persons with severe disabilities. At the same time,
some developers recognized the potential mainstream civilian uses of this technology. Research
advanced in parallel in both rehabilitation technology centers and the computer and communica-
tions industries. Today, voice recognition systems are available on the open market at a much
lower cost than initially, and they are used by people with and without disabilities.
• Tacky surface materials. Tacky plastic sheets, marketed as Dycem or Vykem by assistive technol-
ogy suppliers, were originally used to stabilize telephones, writing pads, dinner plates, and other
items that might be difficult to use for persons with limited coordination. Today, this material is
used for many applications, such as table mats used in boat galleys that keep plates and glasses
from slipping off the table in rough seas.
At the same time, some products start as mainstream and become accessible. The need for afford-
able and easily available assistive technology has caused persons with disabilities and rehabilitation
technologists alike to creatively adapt mainstream commercial products for unforeseen uses. For
example:
• Bicycle grips. Soft foam tubing sold as bicycle grips can be easily purchased in most sports, toy,
and hardware stores to replace inferior or worn-out parts. They also provide a readily available
and inexpensive way to improve grasp for persons having difficulty holding a variety of items.
Smaller-diameter foam tubing sold as pencil grips can be used on smaller utensils to make them
easier to grasp.
UNIVERSAL DESIGN OF PRODUCTS 32.9
• Magnifying glasses. Magnifying glasses are available over the counter in a wide selection of pow-
ers and sizes and in any price range. As a result, people with vision limitations can use these in the
workplace or at home as an alternative to more complex and expensive assistive technologies.
• Cordless headphones. Cordless headphones are a popular gift “for the person who has everything.”
They can also be a very useful assistive technology for the person with a hearing impairment who
doesn’t want to disturb other members of the household by setting the TV or stereo volume at a
high level.
32.5 WHY PRACTICE UNIVERSAL DESIGN FOR PRODUCTS?
Product designers and their clients are beginning to understand and take advantage of the business
incentives that have been created by federal legislation, by improved survival rates after trauma and
illness, as well as by aging populations worldwide.
Accessibility Legislation Supports Universal Design
Various pieces of U.S. legislation require access for persons with disabilities. The Trace Research and
Development Center conducted a research project to identify the factors that motivated businesses to
adopt universal design; for many companies, legislation such as the Telecommunications Act of 1996
provided critical incentives (Trace Research and Development Center, 1999). The Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 has done much to promote accessibility of the built environment by
persons with disabilities. The ADA required the removal of barriers in the built environment as well as
“reasonable accommodation” for qualified employees with disabilities. (For a thorough discussion of
the incentives for practicing universal design in the workplace, see Chap. 23, “Office and Workplace
Design,” by Mueller, in this handbook.)
Universal design can provide cost-effective solutions to environmental access problems. The
home of the Baltimore Orioles baseball team is just one example. Orioles Park at Camden Yards
was designed to incorporate gradual ramps, handrails, and Braille signs as well as 426 seats that
will accommodate wheelchair users. The Camden Seat folds up and pivots out of the way to one
side to create space for a wheelchair user, yet can also be used conventionally by nondisabled fans.
These seats offer a choice of locations and seating prices throughout the stadium (see Beasley and
Davies, 2001).
Several recent laws have drawn attention to the accessibility and usability of electronic data pro-
cessing equipment and telecommunications equipment: the Telecommunications for the Disabled
Act of 1982; the Hearing Aid Compatibility Act of 1988; the Television Decoder Circuitry Act of
1990; Sec. 255 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996; and Sec. 508 of the 1998 Amendments
to the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which has remarkable incentives for universal design (see
Vanderheiden, 2001).
Changing Demographics
Consumer businesses are beginning to understand what rehabilitation professionals have always
known: Disability is a common fact of life. Most people with disabilities develop them during
the course of their lives (National Organization on Disability/Harris Survey of Americans with
Disabilities, 1994). Medical progress has had a profound effect on the treatment of illnesses and
injuries that a short time ago were fatal. Between 1970 and 1997, the survival rate from strokes more
than doubled, and the rate of survival from traumatic brain injuries improved from 10 to 90 percent.
The survival rate from spinal cord injuries has also increased steadily each decade since the 1950s
(Jones and Sanford, 1996). These changes result in more people living with disability now than at
32.10 PUBLIC SPACES, PRIVATE SPACES, PRODUCTS, AND TECHNOLOGIES
any previous time. People with disabilities make up approximately 20 percent of the U.S. population
(McNeil, 1997).
In addition, as life expectancy increases, so does the incidence of disabilities. Persons who are
65 years of age and over made up 11.9 percent of the total U.S. population at the end of 1994, but
they accounted for 30.0 percent of all persons with any disability and 40.1 percent of all persons
with a severe disability (McNeil, 1997). In the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Japan, Sweden,
and Norway, the proportion of persons over 65 years of age is greater than in the United States and
is increasing at a greater rate (Ministry of Welfare, Japan, 1998). Importantly, disability also affects
the families, friends, and business colleagues of people with disabilities.
International Markets: Additional Challenges for Universal Design
Beyond the challenges of language, cultural conventions affect user intuition when faced with a
new design. However, when successful, a product can be an international ambassador for universal
design, as products such as OXO Good Grips have proved. While examples of universally usable
buildings or communities can serve as models only through images and description, one product
can directly affect the quality of the daily lives of millions of individuals around the world. It can
enhance their capabilities, independence, and self-image.
32.6 CONCLUSION
Practicing universal design makes sense for product manufacturers in many respects:
• Legally—accessibility is the law in many venues; universal design not only satisfies but also goes
beyond minimum accessibility standards.
• Politically—practicing universal design can attract beneficial publicity and provide good public
relations.
• Economically—universal design increases the sizes of target markets and consequently, through
economies of scale, reduces unit costs.
• Socially—everyone in society is enriched when all its diverse citizens are able to participate fully.
• Morally—providing maximum access and optimal usability is the right thing to do.
The most significant effect of successful universal design practice is on the social integration
of people with disabilities into their communities. With better product designs, individuals with
disabilities can manage independently in their own homes, communicate using various media and
seek a wider range of jobs, travel safely along streets, use public transit, and interact with various
environmental features as easily as anyone without a disability. When products are created using
universal design, individuals with disabilities have more opportunities to become active participants
in, and contributors to, the society in which they live, to the enrichment of all.
32.7 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Beasley, K. A., and T. D. Davies, “Access to Sports and Entertainment,” in Universal Design Handbook, 1st ed.,
W. F. E. Preiser and E. Ostroff (eds.), New York: McGraw-Hill, 2001.
Jones, M. L., and J. A. Sanford, People with Mobility Impairments in the United States Today and in 2010,
Assistive Technology, 8(1): 43–52, 1996.
Mace, R. L., “The Evolution of Universal Design,” keynote speech presented at Designing for the 21st Century:
An International Conference on Universal Design, June 19, 1998, Hempstead, N.Y.: Hofstra University, 1998.
UNIVERSAL DESIGN OF PRODUCTS 32.11
———, G. J. Hardie, and J. P. Place, “Accessible Environments: Toward Universal Design,” in Design
Intervention: Toward a More Humane Architecture, W. F. E. Preiser, J. C. Vischer, and E. T. White (eds.), New
York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1991.
McNeil, J. M., “Americans with Disabilities: 1994–95: U.S. Bureau of the Census,” Current Population Reports,
P70-61, Washington: Government Printing Office, 1997.
Ministry of Welfare, “The Percentage of Elderly People Who Are 65 Years Old and Over,” Tokyo, Japan, 1998.
Mueller, J., Case Studies in Universal Design, Raleigh: Center for Universal Design, North Carolina State
University, 1997.
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR), “Long Range Plan,” in Federal Register,
64(3), Dec. 7, 1999, Washington: Government Printing Office, 1999.
National Organization on Disability/Harris Survey of Americans with Disabilities, Study No. 942003, New York:
Louis Harris and Associates, Inc., 1994.
Story, M. F., J. L. Mueller, and R. L. Mace, The Universal Design File: Designing for People of All Ages and
Abilities, Raleigh: Center for Universal Design, North Carolina State University, 1998.
Trace Research and Development Center, Universal Design Research Project, 1999; available online at www
.trace.wisc.edu/docs/univ_design_res_proj/udrp.htm.
Vanderheiden, G. C., “Fundamentals and Priorities for Design of Information and Telecommunications
Technologies,” in Universal Design Handbook, 1st ed., W. F. E. Preiser and E. Ostroff (eds.), New York:
McGraw-Hill, 2001.
This page intentionally left blank
CHAPTER 33
ACCESSIBILITY OF THE WORLD
WIDE WEB: TECHNICAL AND
POLICY PERSPECTIVES
Judy Brewer
33.1 INTRODUCTION
The recently passed United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities declares
the right of access to information as a fundamental right of all persons including those with disabili-
ties. The World Wide Web is the cornerstone of the information society; in most countries it is now a
primary gateway to information, education, employment, government services, citizen participation,
social networking, entertainment, and more. To what extent does the web welcome people with dis-
abilities and older users, or does it place barriers in their path? This chapter examines issues of acces-
sibility and universal design of the web from several perspectives—user requirements, public policy,
technology support, guidelines, evaluation, and education—highlighting activities and resources at
the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) such as the Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI).
33.2 A RANGE OF ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS
While there are no overt physical barriers such as stairs on the web, and while access to web-based
information is in some ways a vast improvement over the barriers in printed information, the web is just
as prone to accessibility barriers as is any other environment. Accessibility barriers on the web affect
people with many different disabilities. For example, users with visual disabilities such as blindness
or low vision may miss information that is represented in graphics or video unless it is accompanied
by alternative text. Users who are deaf or hard of hearing may miss information in audio files unless
it is captioned. Users with physical disabilities may have difficulty navigating through some web sites
by voice recognition. Web sites without consistent navigation options, or with flashing or scrolling
text, can make navigation and comprehension difficult for users with dyslexia, short-term memory
problems, and other cognitive or neurological disabilities. Older users sometimes have combinations of
several of these same requirements, although they may not consider themselves “disabled.”
Given that the web has already largely displaced traditional means of accessing information—for
instance, local offices where in-person contact is possible, or telephone-based information services
where voice contact is possible—it is paramount that industry, government, and the user community
work together to ensure accessibility of web-based services. Otherwise, for many people with dis-
abilities, continued expansion of the web will mean exclusion from educational and employment
opportunities, and from participation in commerce, civic life, and more.
33.1
33.2 PUBLIC SPACES, PRIVATE SPACES, PRODUCTS, AND TECHNOLOGIES
Accessibility and Universal Design of the Web
Accessibility of the web contributes substantially to universal design. Besides accessibility, other
aspects of universal design of the web include device independence, internationalization, usability,
and affordability. In the context of this chapter, accessibility refers to access by people with disabili-
ties and older users. Device independence refers to access to the web regardless of the type of device
that one is using, e.g., a desktop computer with a mouse, a mobile phone, an information kiosk, a TV,
a landline-based telephone. Internationalization means ensuring that web technologies can represent
web content equally well across all the world’s languages. Usability refers to general human factors
issues. Affordability refers to issues of economic access to computers and Internet services.
Efforts to promote accessibility of the web first emerged in 1995. In 1997 the World Wide Web
Consortium (W3C) launched the Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI). Since then, WAI’s efforts, in
partnership with the efforts of hundreds of organizations around the world, have generated a large
stream of resources to address accessibility of the web. As mobile phones converged into the web
space, interest emerged within industry around the carryover benefits of web accessibility for device
independence, including access to the web over mobile phones.
The Web Accessibility Initiative at the World Wide Web Consortium
The W3C is an international, vendor-neutral, and primarily industry consortium that develops the core
technologies used on the web. It has over 400 member organizations and is hosted jointly by MIT’s
Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Lab (CSAIL) in the United States, by the European Research
Consortium on Informatics and Mathematics (ERCIM) in France, and by Keio University in Japan.
WAI is one of four main divisions of W3C’s technical work. W3C’s Web Accessibility Initiative
addresses accessibility at multiple levels in order to identify and promote comprehensive accessibil-
ity solutions for the web. On the most fundamental level, WAI ensures that the core technologies of
the web can support accessibility in over 100 different W3C specifications, for instance, by support-
ing captions for audio and descriptions of video in Synchronized Multimedia Integration Language
(SMIL) 3.0 (Bulterman, et al., 2008).
WAI provides guidance on how to use web technologies in ways that support accessibility through
three WAI guidelines and supporting techniques documents. In the Web Content Accessibility
Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 (Caldwell et al., 2008a), WAI describes how to design web content and
applications that are accessible yet also advanced from a technical and design standpoint. The
Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines (ATAG) 2.0 (Richards et al., 2009), under development,
addresses developers of software used to build web sites by providing guidance on the use of web
standards, on support for accessible authoring practices, and on accessibility of the user interface.
The User Agent Accessibility Guidelines (UAAG) 2.0 (Allan et al., 2009), also under development,
provides guidance for developers of user agents, including browsers, multimedia players, and their
interoperability with assistive technologies. The focus in UAAG 2.0 is on accessibility of the user
interface and on access to accessibility information in web content and applications.
In addition to development of these guidelines, WAI is developing Accessible Rich Internet
Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 (Craig et al., 2009), which addresses accessibility of dynamic web
content. WAI also works on different approaches for evaluation and retrofitting of web sites and
transformation tools for inaccessible sites, develops education and outreach materials, and coordi-
nates with other organizations researching future web technologies.
33.3 A POLICY CONTEXT FOR ACCESSIBILITY OF THE WEB
Over the past decade, WAI guidelines have become a common reference point in many government
policies relating to web accessibility around the world. Because the web is not a single entity, but
rather a decentralized information space to which individuals and organizations all over the world
contribute in various ways, no one set of laws can apply consistently across all these communities.
ACCESSIBILITY OF THE WORLD WIDE WEB: TECHNICAL AND POLICY PERSPECTIVES 33.3
However, use of a consistent set of web accessibility standards is not only possible but also helpful.
From the perspective of web users with disabilities, the functional requirements for accessibility to
the web are identical around the world; while from a developer’s perspective, consistent standards
for web accessibility can make their jobs far easier.
Regulation of Rapidly Evolving Technologies
It can be challenging for public policy to keep pace with the rapid evolution of information and
communications technologies (ICT). Innovative technologies may seem a curiosity in their initial
introduction to market, but then suddenly become essential elements of business communications.
This often occurs before policy makers have learned about the technologies, let alone had time to
consider appropriate policies to mitigate potential ramifications on accessibility. Similarly, the dis-
ability community may not always be able to learn about the potential impact of each new technol-
ogy quickly enough to articulate and protect their interests. Without a fluency in the technical jargon
and sufficient understanding of the development and standardization processes within industry, the
disability community has less chance of gaining timely access to policy discussions that can affect
the extent to which accessibility and universal design are considered in the development of new
technologies. Yet direct participation of people with disabilities is essential to the identification of
barriers and the development of appropriate and useful solutions.
Public Policy Trends around Web Accessibility
There are several commonly used approaches to regulating accessibility of information technolo-
gies. Governments can establish that individuals with disabilities have a civil right to certain kinds
of information; they can require that products or services sold within a country meet certain criteria
for accessibility; and they can require that information technologies procured by certain kinds of
organizations be accessible.
The first approach—establishing that access to certain kinds of information by individuals with
disabilities is a civil right—is usually tied to a disability discrimination act, such as the Disability
Discrimination Act in the United Kingdom, or in Australia, or the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) in the United States. Usually, this approach applies primarily to government web sites, but in
some cases it can extend beyond those to apply to certain kinds of commercial sites. An example of
the second approach is Section 255 of the Telecommunications Act, which requires accessibility to the
extent readily achievable of telecommunications products and services sold in the United States.
An example of the third approach is Section 508 of the U.S. Rehabilitation Act, which sets require-
ments for accessibility of electronic and information technology procured by the federal government,
including web sites. It has the dual goal of ensuring that federal employees with disabilities have
comparable access as do nondisabled employees to the information technology in their workplaces,
and that members of the public with disabilities have access to government information in accessible
formats. Given the extent of government information technology purchasing power, estimated in the
multibillion-dollar range, this approach has significant leveraging impact on the web industry in the
United States with regard to promoting awareness of accessibility, development of accessibility exper-
tise within the web design community, and demand for authoring tools that support accessible design.
33.4 ACCESSIBILITY OF CORE WEB TECHNOLOGIES
As new web technologies advance through stages of development from initial concept to finished
specification in W3C, WAI reviews these specifications to assess their potential impact on accessibil-
ity. This process starts with reviewing working group charters, requirements documents, and early
working drafts; then last-call drafts, candidate recommendations, and proposed recommendations. It
continues until the specifications are issued as final W3C Recommendations, equivalent to web stan-
dards. Such reviews have resulted in improved accessibility support throughout W3C specifications.
33.4 PUBLIC SPACES, PRIVATE SPACES, PRODUCTS, AND TECHNOLOGIES
33.5 GUIDELINES FOR ACCESSIBILITY TO WEB CONTENT
The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0, completed in December 2008, addresses
accessibility of web content, web sites, and web applications. WCAG 2.0 is an advancement over
WCAG 1.0 in a number of ways: WCAG 2.0 addresses advanced web technologies including dynami-
cally generated web content; WCAG 2.0 is technology-neutral, as the guidelines can be applied to any
web technology; WCAG 2.0 is more precisely testable, facilitating conformance testing; and WCAG
2.0 allows improved accessibility for people with disabilities. As with WCAG 1.0, the components of
WCAG 2.0 were developed with international input from a broad range of stakeholder organizations,
including disability organizations, industry, government organizations, and more.
WCAG 2.0 has four main principles of accessibility: that web content should be perceivable
regardless of the abilities of the user, and that it should be operable, understandable, and robust.
These four principles underlie the specific guidelines and success criteria that make up WCAG 2.0,
and also form the organizing principles of the Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines (ATAG) 2.0
and the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines (UAAG) 2.0. The normative and testable portion of
WCAG 2.0 is the success criteria. Extensive supporting technical guidance for web developers is
provided in “Techniques” documents, which address applicability of WCAG 2.0 to web technologies
such as HTML, CSS, SMIL, and scripting. As web technologies evolve, WAI updates each of these
resources to address new technologies.
33.6 GUIDELINES FOR ACCESSIBILITY OF AUTHORING TOOLS
Accessibility of the web relies on implementation of complementary accessibility solutions at sev-
eral different levels—the content, browsers, and media players; but also improved authoring tools
that enable more automatic creation and production of accessible web content. Authoring tools such
as HTML editors and content management systems increasingly include features that can be used to
evaluate, transform, or retrofit web sites for improved accessibility.
Authoring tools hold the greatest promise for dramatically increasing the amount of accessible con-
tent on the web. First consider that the web is an “information space,” where tens of millions of people
are already publishing information. Then consider the effort involved in educating every one of those
people to understand and use accessibility guidelines whenever they put information on the web. It is
far easier to ensure that the authoring tools that people use to publish web content facilitate production
of accessible web content than to expect each content developer to follow accessibility guidelines.
W3C’s Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines explains to the developers of authoring tools
how to support production of accessible content. For instance, when images or videos are added into
web content, authors can be prompted for descriptions; and when audio is added, authors can be
prompted for captions. In addition, ATAG explains how to ensure that the authoring tools themselves
are accessible to people with disabilities, so that people with disabilities are equally able to publish
information on the web. For example, mouse-driven commands should also be accessible from the
keyboard, since authors with physical or visual disabilities may not be able to use a mouse.
33.7 GUIDELINES FOR BROWSERS, MEDIA PLAYERS, AND
INTEROPERABILITY WITH ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGIES
Improved accessibility is also needed in the browsers, media players, and assistive technologies that
people use to access the web. WAI provides guidance for developers of these types of applications
through the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines. UAAG addresses the accessibility of browsers and
media players for people with disabilities, for instance, by explaining the need to render certain types
of accessibility information such as descriptions for complex charts or graphs, or captions for audio
files. In addition, UAAG addresses interoperability between mainstream browsers or multimedia
ACCESSIBILITY OF THE WORLD WIDE WEB: TECHNICAL AND POLICY PERSPECTIVES 33.5
players and various kinds of assistive technologies such as screen readers, screen magnifiers, or
speech recognition software.
33.8 CONFORMANCE EVALUATION
Evaluation is important throughout the design and development of web sites, as well as when a web
site is completed. WCAG 2.0 has been specifically designed to be more testable than WCAG 1.0
through a combination of semiautomated evaluation tools and evaluation by knowledgeable human
experts. In addition, evaluation by users with disabilities can be helpful in ensuring usable acces-
sibility. There are over 100 different evaluation tools that can be used to test for different aspects of
web accessibility. WAI resources such as Selecting Web Accessibility Evaluation Tools and Tools
Search can help designers and developers identify evaluation tools that can help with the particular
technologies used in a web site.
33.9 EDUCATION AND OUTREACH
Given the number of people contributing content to the web worldwide, it is essential to have a vari-
ety of educational and outreach materials, both to promote awareness of the need for web accessibil-
ity and to support training on implementation of web accessibility. Online resources available from
the WAI site (www.w3.org/WAI) include introductory resources on web accessibility and resources
on specific topics, such as the business case for web accessibility. Additional educational resources
focusing on web accessibility are emerging on many other web sites.
33.10 CONCLUSION
While work on web accessibility has been underway since 1997, key challenges remain. These
include the need to monitor emerging web technologies for potential new barriers to accessibility,
and the need to exercise vigilance over technologies such as mobile devices, digital television, geolo-
cation, e-reading, and more, which are converging into web space. Challenges also include the need
to develop better methods of evaluating conformance to web accessibility standards, and the need to
accelerate support for production of accessible content by authoring tools. In a field that is evolving
and expanding as rapidly as the World Wide Web, interest in accessibility does not automatically
translate into widespread and comprehensive implementation of accessibility solutions. Therefore,
one challenge is to ensure that the availability of educational resources and accessibility solutions
keeps pace with—or, better yet, outstrips—the availability of new technologies for the web.
To a far greater extent than with the built environment, it is important to avoid the fragmentation
of standards for web accessibility, since so many web accessibility solutions rely on complemen-
tary approaches on several levels at once. WAI will continue to play an important role in bringing
together international collaborations around web accessibility. These collaborations should reinforce
an awareness of the importance of harmonizing standards.
33.11 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Allan, J., K. Ford, J. Richards, and J. Spellman, User Agent Accessibility Guidelines (UAAG) 2.0 Working Draft,
W3C (MIT, ERCIM, Keio), 2009; www.w3.org/TR/UAAG20/.
Bulterman, D., J. Jansen, P. Cesar, S. Mullender, M. DeMeglio, J. Quint, P. Vuorimaa, et al., Synchronized
Multimedia Integration Language (SMIL) 3.0, W3C (MIT, ERCIM, Keio), 2008; www.w3.org/TR/SMIL/.