Difference between revisions of "Hornbill WCAG 2.1 Status"
Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
<h2> </h2> | <h2> </h2> | ||
− | |||
<h2>5. Commitment to Accessibility Improvements</h2> | <h2>5. Commitment to Accessibility Improvements</h2> | ||
Line 47: | Line 46: | ||
We recognize that we do not understand how these unaddressed issues might be applied in a practical sense, and so want to tackle the remaining issues as and when there are practical examples we can work with. We remain both committed and open-minded about these items and will address them, but are hoping to work with customers on individual requirements and individual user needs as required. | We recognize that we do not understand how these unaddressed issues might be applied in a practical sense, and so want to tackle the remaining issues as and when there are practical examples we can work with. We remain both committed and open-minded about these items and will address them, but are hoping to work with customers on individual requirements and individual user needs as required. | ||
+ | |||
+ | <h2> </h2> | ||
<h2>6. Summary and Recommended Actions</h2> | <h2>6. Summary and Recommended Actions</h2> |
Revision as of 16:45, 11 August 2020
Accessibility Evaluation Report for WCAG 2.1
1. Executive Summary
This report describes the conformance of the Hornbill Collaboration Core and its applications with W3C's Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 and 2.1. The Success Criteria (checklist) is described in Section 5 below and is based on the Success Criteria checklist provided by W3C ( https://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-WCAG20-20060427/appendixB.html )
2. Last Reviewed
- http://live.hornbill.com/INSTANCE_NAME/
- February 26, 2019
- English
3. Reviewer
- Daniel Dekel - Principal Web Developer
- Hornbill Technologies Limited
4. Review Process
- WCAG 2.1 Level 1 (A), Level 2 (AA) and Level 3 (AAA)
- Used HTMLHint (http://htmlhint.com/) to validate the HTML Content of all our source code
- Used W3C Checklist and Overview (https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/) (Section 5)
- https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/new-in-21/
- Made a manual review to our source code and our run-time environment
5. Commitment to Accessibility Improvements
We have not fully met every point in the requirements so far. Some of the unaddressed points are subjective, and we don't fully understand the application of them in all cases, leaving it difficult for us to make meaningful changes that will serve people with impaired sight issues without degrading the product for them or for anyone else.
To that end, we have taken the view that rather than trying to meet every point just for the sake of ticking the boxes, the more subjective/ambiguous points have not been addressed because we do not have enough of an understanding about how we might address the issues without degrading the function of Hornbill's products.
We recognize that we do not understand how these unaddressed issues might be applied in a practical sense, and so want to tackle the remaining issues as and when there are practical examples we can work with. We remain both committed and open-minded about these items and will address them, but are hoping to work with customers on individual requirements and individual user needs as required.
6. Summary and Recommended Actions
Overall:
There are 78 checks in total. 50 are fully met. 15 are partially met and 13 are not.
Results for Level 1 (A):
There are 30 checks in total for Level 1
26 are fully met. 4 are partially met.
In all the 5 cases that are partially or not meeting the success criteria, can be easily implemented.
Results for Level 2 (AA):
There are 20 checks in total for Level 2
16 are fully met. 2 are partially met and 2 are not.
In 2 cases that are partially meeting the success criteria can be easily implemented.
Results for Level 3 (AAA):
There are 28 checks in total for Level 3
8 are fully met. 9 are partially met and 11 are not.
In most cases of the partially or not meeting the success criteria will be difficult to implement.
General
Markup changes are relatively easy to improve.
Colour restrictions (like Luminosity Contrast Ratio) can be implemented by adding an extra style for people with partial sight allowing then to use that style in their profile settings (acceptance 4.2.1 and 4.2.3) Some areas of the system allow customers to customize the colours of foreground text and background.
Supplementary linguistic or illustrative help will be difficult to implement as it requires an addition of manpower time to each one of the new and old tasks.
7. Summary Check List