Making Web Sites Accessible Without Sacrificing Aesthetics

Some Common Myths About Web Accessibility

There are a number of misconceptions about Web site accessibility that prevent people from making an effort to incorporate accessibility into their sites. Because of the range of myths surrounding Web accessibility, many businesses decide not to make their Web sites accessible. Let’s take a look at some of the most common myths about accessible Web design.

Myth 1: Web Accessibility Is Time Consuming and Expensive

The belief that Web accessibility is time consuming and expensive stems from the idea that the process of creating an accessible Web site is more complicated and very different from creating a site that is not accessible. However, developers use the same programming languages and technologies in creating accessible Web sites—though perhaps more thoughtfully and with more understanding and attention to detail in order to create sites that are in accordance with best practices.

Creating an accessible site is neither a particularly expensive nor time-consuming process—especially if developers do things in the correct way from the very beginning. In contrast, rebuilding an inaccessible site to make it accessible can often be difficult and expensive—all the more reason to incorporate accessibility into a site from the start.

Myth 2: Accessible Sites Are Exclusive

Some people believe that accessible Web sites benefit only a small percentage of the population. This seems to be the main argument business owners use when they want to avoid making the effort to create an accessible Web site. They often say that people with disabilities do not use their sites. But how can they if a Web site is inaccessible to them?

However, in actuality, accessible sites are inclusive. Approximately 650 million people have a disability that affects their use of the Internet, while even more of us may have some temporary form of disability at some point—such as a broken wrist or a migraine.

Accessibility not only benefits people who have temporary or permanent health problems or physical or cognitive disabilities, but can be useful to the entire Web community. An accessible site’s clear layout, consistent navigation, and meaningful link names provide ease of use to everyone—especially those visiting a content-heavy site for the first time.

Myth 3: Automated Tools Are Sufficient for Evaluating Accessibility

Automated evaluation tools are particularly helpful for accessibility testing because they can reduce the time and effort that is necessary to achieve accessibility by identifying some potential issues. However, they cannot replace manual testing. Many of the WCAG checkpoints require human judgment. An automated tool can check whether an image has an alternative text description, but it cannot judge whether the description is accurate and meaningful.

Myth 4: Web Accessibility Is Required by Law

The Equality Act of 2010 makes it illegal to discriminate against those with disabilities. If someone with a disability were unable to access the information on a Web site, it could be perceived as discrimination. For example, it would be unlawful to deliberately use color contrast to make a Web site’s content inaccessible to a partially sighted service user. However, discrimination can be hard to prove.

Designing an Accessible Future

While Web accessibility was once commonly overlooked, today it is considered a fundamental objective. It is, therefore, the responsibility of UX professionals to be accountable for providing a holistic, design-orientated approach to Web accessibility. The goal should be to create a Web site that is usable by everyone to the greatest extent possible, without requiring any rework or specialized design.

Web accessibility is not just about disabled users being able to access a Web site; it is about providing an exceptional user experience to ensure universal access while maintaining a high level of creativity, aesthetic design, and functionality.