Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Expert Validation of the ICT Accessibility Requirements Tool Prototype

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Novel Design Approaches and Technologies (HCII 2022)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 13308))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The Accessibility Requirements Tool for Information and Communication Technologies (FRlATIC) was developed within the work of a doctoral project, at the University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro, and may be used at various stages of public procurement processes as well as projects and developments that include ICT products and services. This tool helps to consult, determine and assess the accessibility requirements for ICT products and services in European Standard EN 301 549 supporting the legislation in the field of public procurement for the countries of the European Union – Directive 2014/24/EU. This study focuses on the validation of the FRATIC prototype with 25 experts in the areas of accessibility, assistive technologies and public procurement, by conducting semi-structured interviews on this research subject and the FRATIC tool in particular, which were conducted after performing usability tests with the tool. A thematic analysis method was used to assess the qualitative data from the interviews.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Designations of the three European standardization organizations: European Committee for Standardization (CEN), European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization (CENELEC) and European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI).

  2. 2.

    Accessibility Requirements Tool, available at https://www.section508.gov/art.

  3. 3.

    Accessible ICT Procurement Toolkit, available from December 2014 to February 2021 at http://mandate376.standards.eu/.

References

  1. Reicher, S.C.: Diversidade humana e assimetrias: uma releitura do contrato social sob a ótica das capacidades. SUR-Revista Int. Direitos Humanos 8(14), 173–185 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  2. WHO and WB: World report on disability (2011). https://www.who.int/. Accessed 10 June 2021

  3. Silva, J.S.: Metodologia para engenharia de software inclusiva out-of-the-box. Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Vila Real (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Comissão Europeia: People with disabilities have equal rights - TheEuropean Disability Strategy 2010–2020. Comissão Europeia. Comissão Europeia, Bruxelas (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  5. INE: Health and disabilities in Portugal: 2011. Instituto Nacional de Estatística, IP, Lisboa (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Mitra, S., Palmer, M., Kim, H., Mont, D., Groce, N.: Extra costs of living with a disability: a review and agenda for research. Disabil. Health J. 10(4), 475–484 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Amado-Salvatierra, H.R., Hernández, R., Hilera, J.R.: Implementation of accessibility standards in the process of course design in virtual learning environments. Procedia Comput. Sci. 14, 363–370 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. United Nations: Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. United Nations, New York (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Martins, M., Gonçalves, R., Godinho, F., Novais, J.: Benefits of EN 301 549 for each group of people with special needs. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Software Development and Technologies for Enhancing Accessibility and Fighting Info-exclusion, pp. 123–128 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  10. ETSI, CEN, and CENELEC: EN 301 549 V1.1.1 - Accessibility requirements suitable for public procurement of ICT products and services in Europe. European Telecommunications Standards Institute, França (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  11. ETSI, CEN, and CENELEC: EN 301 549 V1.1.2 - Accessibility requirements suitable for public procurement of ICT products and services in Europe. European Telecommunications Standards Institute, França (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  12. ETSI, CEN, and CENELEC: EN 301 549 V2.1.2 - Accessibility requirements for ICT products and services. European Telecommunications Standards Institute (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  13. ETSI, CEN, and CENELEC: EN 301 549 V3.2.1 - Accessibility requirements for ICT products and services. European Telecommunications Standards Institute (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  14. ETSI, CEN, and CENELEC: EN 301 549 V3.1.1 - Accessibility requirements for ICT products and services. European Telecommunications Standards Institute (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Parlamento Europeu: Diretiva (UE) 2014/24 do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho de 26 de fevereiro de 2014 relativa aos contratos públicos e que revoga a Diretiva 2004/18/CE. Jornal Oficial da União Europeia. Estrasburgo, 65–242 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Cohen, L., Manion, L., Morrison, K.: Research Methods in Education, 8th edn. Routledge, London (2017)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  17. Klironomos, I., Antona, M., Basdekis, I., Stephanidis, C.: White paper: promoting design for all and e-accessibility in Europe. Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 5(1), 105–119 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Iwarsson, S., Ståhl, A.: Accessibility, usability and universal design—positioning and definition of concepts describing person-environment relationships. Disabil. Rehabil. 25(2), 57–66 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Castells, M.: A galáxia internet: reflexões sobre Internet. Negócios e Soc. Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian, Lisboa (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Gouveia, L., Gaio, S.: Sociedade da Informação: balanço e implicações. Porto Edições Univ, Fernando Pessoa (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Gonçalves, R., Martins, J., Pereira, J., Oliveira, M.A.-Y., Ferreira, J.J.P.: Enterprise web accessibility levels amongst the Forbes 250: where art thou o virtuous leader? J. Bus. Ethics 113(2), 363–375 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Bares, R., Vickers, S., Istance, H.O.: Gaze interaction with virtual on-line communities: levelling the playing field for disabled users. Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 9(3), 261–272 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Martins, M., Cunha, A., Oliveira, I., Morgado, L.: Usability test of 3Dconnexion 3D mice versus keyboard + mouse in Second Life undertaken by people with motor disabilities due to medullary lesions. Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 14(1), 5–16 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Emiliani, P.L., Stephanidis, C.: Universal access to ambient intelligence environments: opportunities and challenges for people with disabilities. IBM Syst. J. 44(3), 605–619 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. McKinney, S., Horspool, A., Willers, R., Safie, O., Richlin, L.: Using second life with learning-disabled students in higher education. Innov. J. Online Educ. 5(2) (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Magnusson, L., Hanson, E., Borg, M.: A literature review study of information and communication technology as a support for frail older people living at home and their family carers. Technol. Disabil. 16(4), 223–235 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Foley, A., Ferri, B.A.: Technology for people, not disabilities: ensuring access and inclusion. J. Res. Spec. Educ. Needs 12(4), 192–200 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Benfer, E.A.: The ADA amendments act: an overview of recent changes to the Americans with disabilities act. Advance 4, 53 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  29. US Access Board: Information and Communication Technology (ICT) - Revised 508 Standards and 255 Guidelines. US Federal Register, Washington (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  30. US Access Board: Electronic and information technology accessibility standards. Fed. Regist. 15, 2005 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Lecerf, M.: Briefing - EU Legislation in Progress, European Accessibility Act. Parlamento Europeu, Bruxelas (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Parlamento Europeu: Diretiva (UE) 2019/882, relativa aos requisitos de acessibilidade dos produtos e serviços. Jornal Oficial da União Europeia (2019). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/PT/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32019L0882&from=EN. Accessed 30 May 2021

  33. Comissão Europeia: European Commission - Press release - Comissão saúda acordo para tornar mais acessíveis sítios Web e aplicações móveis do setor público. Comissão Europeia (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Astbrink, G., Tibben, W.: ICT accessibility criteria in public procurement in OECD countries – the current situation. In: Stephanidis, C., Antona, M. (eds.) UAHCI 2013. LNCS, vol. 8009, pp. 155–164. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39188-0_17

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  35. Ahtonen, A., Pardo, R.: The accessibility act-using the single market to promote fundamental rights. European Policy Centre, vol. 12 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  36. ITU: Accessible Europe 2019 Background Paper, Standards in the Procurement of Accessible ICT Products and Services. International Telecommunication Union, Geneva, Switzerland (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Esteves, A.J.: Metodologias qualitativas, perspectivas gerais. Metodol. Qual. para as Ciências Sociais, Inst. Sociol. da Fac. Let. da Univ. do Porto, Porto (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M.: Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. SAGE, Thousand Oaks (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Braun, V., Clarke, V.: Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 3(2), 77–101 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Braun, V., Clarke, V.: Successful Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide for Beginners. SAGE, Thousand Oaks (2013)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is financed by FCT, Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology), supported by funding from POPH/FSE.

This article reflects the views only of the author, and FCT cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. INESC TEC and University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro, Vila Real, Portugal

    Márcio Martins & Ramiro Gonçalves

  2. University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro, Vila Real, Portugal

    Francisco Godinho & Pedro Gonçalves

Authors
  1. Márcio Martins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Francisco Godinho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pedro Gonçalves
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ramiro Gonçalves
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Márcio Martins .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH), Heraklion, Crete, Greece

    Margherita Antona

  2. University of Crete and Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH), Heraklion, Crete, Greece

    Constantine Stephanidis

Appendix 1 – Semi-structured Interview (Post-test) Script

Appendix 1 – Semi-structured Interview (Post-test) Script

  1. 1.

    Have you ever participated, or are you participating in any way in public procurement procedures for ICT products and services?

  2. 2.

    In order to determine accessibility requirements and their means of verifying compliance for a specific ICT, do you think that the official EN 301 549 document (PDF) alone is intuitive, easy to understand, and quick to use, to be considered as sufficient for possible interested parties to perform such tasks? Why?

  3. 3.

    Do you know of any tools that can help to globally evaluate the technical accessibility criteria specified in EN 301 549?

  4. 4.

    If so, how often have you used them or how often do you use them?

  5. 5.

    Did you have any difficulties adapting when you started using FRATIC? Regarding organization or amount of information, for example.

  6. 6.

    As you were using the tool, did the features seem intuitive to you?

  7. 7.

    Did you experience any difficulties when using or creating content on FRATIC? In any of the tasks in this usability test or others.

  8. 8.

    If so, what do you think could be done to overcome these difficulties?

  9. 9.

    When filtering the accessibility requirements, do you find it pertinent to preview the notes for each requirement along with its description? Or do you think that the description of each requirement would suffice, since in case of need you would consult more information in the Consultation section?

  10. 10.

    Do you think that using FRATIC can bring some benefits to those who need to determine and evaluate the technical criteria, covered by EN 301 549, for a specific ICT?

  11. 11.

    Among the people you know, to whom would the FRATIC tool be useful? Describe this person professionally.

  12. 12.

    Considering the scope of EN 301 549, do you think the fact that the tool brings together the ability to determine and evaluate the requirements of many different ICTs could be a determining factor in its utility and success?

  13. 13.

    Do you think the FRATIC tool could contribute to the compliance with the Directive 2016/2102/EU rules, on accessibility of websites and mobile applications of public bodies, and the Decree Law No. 83/2018, of October 19, which transposes the aforementioned Directive into the national legal framework? Justify.

  14. 14.

    Do you think this tool could contribute to the introduction and compliance with technical accessibility criteria in public procurement of ICT products and services?

  15. 15.

    Do you think FRATIC can contribute to the creation and purchase of technology accessible to all?

  16. 16.

    Aiming at achieving a more inclusive society, do you think that the potential of this tool could be useful for you or for other people?

  17. 17.

    Do you think it is relevant to have FRATIC functionalities available on the Web, or simultaneously available both on the Web and in Microsoft Excel?

  18. 18.

    Given your knowledge in the area of assistive technologies/accessibility and the experience with FRATIC, do you have any remarks or suggestions to improve the features of the tool?

  19. 19.

    Finally, do you have any further comments, or thoughts?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Martins, M., Godinho, F., Gonçalves, P., Gonçalves, R. (2022). Expert Validation of the ICT Accessibility Requirements Tool Prototype. In: Antona, M., Stephanidis, C. (eds) Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Novel Design Approaches and Technologies. HCII 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13308. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05028-2_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05028-2_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-05027-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-05028-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation