> AccessForAllFramework

The following 394 words could not be found in the dictionary of 550 words (including 550 LocalSpellingWords) and are highlighted below:

ability   about   ac   Acc   access   Access   accessed   Accessibility   accessibility   Accessible   accessible   Acknowledgements   Adaptive   Af   affect   agents   aims   all   All   Alternative   alternative   always   an   An   Anastasia   and   Andy   another   anticipates   any   Any   anyone   appended   application   applications   applied   approach   are   as   assumed   at   audience   Australia   automatically   barrierfree   based   be   behind   being   Board   Both   Braille   but   by   ca   called   can   Canada   Center   Centre   characteristics   Cheetham   clarify   class   clearly   cognitive   com   communities   community   complementary   Computer   concepts   conjunction   connect   considered   contain   content   Content   context   contributed   Cooper   currently   data   David   dc   define   defined   defines   Department   describe   described   describes   Describing   description   Description   descriptions   design   designed   developed   development   different   Digital   digital   disabilities   discussion   div   divided   do   document   does   done   Educational   either   enables   engaged   enough   especially   even   example   examples   Exchange   explain   explained   explains   explanations   expressed   eyes   faculty   Faculty   following   Foot   For   for   form   format   framework   Framework   from   From   functional   G20   general   given   goal   Group   group   guidelines   Guidelines   Hallam   has   have   Heath   History   hope   how   however   href   human   idea   if   implemented   implies   imsglobal   in   Inclusive   individual   information   Information   Institute   intellectual   intended   interact   interacted   interested   into   Introduction   is   it   its   Its   jiscmail   Johnson   join   Joseph   Jutta   La   Learner   Learning   least   leave   level   Liddy   list   lists   located   looking   machine   Madeleine   mailing   main   make   making   manually   Martyn   matched   Matching   matching   means   Media   medium   meeting   Meta   metadata   might   missing   mode   modes   National   Needs   needs   Nevile   new   not   Note   number   of   on   Open   or   order   original   originally   others   output   Package   particular   party   people   perceptual   person   personal   Personal   persons   Pete   Pictorial   please   possible   Powell   preferences   Preferences   presented   principles   problems   process   processing   proficiency   profile   properly   properties   provide   provided   range   rarely   rather   read   readable   reader   readers   receives   recommended   reference   referenced   refers   rel   Relationship   relevant   rely   rendered   representation   requirements   resource   Resource   resources   Resources   Rothberg   same   satisfy   Scheuhammer   Science   Sciences   See   sense   sensed   Set   set   Sets   Sheffield   significant   skill   small   software   solve   Some   some   sp   specific   Specification   specifications   speech   standards   statement   statements   such   suitable   swapped   system   tag   tags   Team   technical   techniques   technologies   Technology   technorati   Textual   textual   that   The   the   their   Their   them   then   There   there   these   they   They   This   this   those   though   through   tile   time   times   to   To   Together   Toronto   Treviranus   Trobe   two   type   uk   understand   understood   Univerity   universally   University   Usage   use   used   user   User   users   uses   via   video   visit   visual   w3   way   Web   Website   Weinkauf   welcome   well   were   what   What   when   whereby   which   while   wide   will   wishes   with   work   worked   Working   working   would  

Clear message

The AccessForAll Framework is a general framework to be implemented in a number of communities and this representation of it aims to be the general representation for such communities. There is a discussion list for those interested in AfA metadata. Any interested party is welcome to join that mailing list. To join or leave the dc-accessibility mailing list, please visit http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/dc-accessibility.html.

AccessForAll (AfA): an Accessibility Framework

Introduction

This document explains the AccessForAll accessibility framework. The intended audience of this document is anyone interested in accessibility and standards, especially those from the metadata community. A small proficiency in software design is assumed from the reader (for this document uses UML in some of its explanations), however the hope is that the concepts are explained clearly enough to be understood by readers of any technical skill-level.

What is AccessForAll

AccessForAll is a framework designed to define and describe resource accessibility. Its goal is to provide a means whereby resources are matched to the individual accessibility needs and preferences of a particular person. The framework is divided into the following concepts, which, when used in conjunction, make possible the meeting of resources to needs and preferences and the description of resource accessibility:

The main idea behind the AfA work is that while there are guidelines for making resources universally accessible, they are rarely used properly and they do not always solve all problems. AfA is about matching resources to an individual's requirements, even if it is not suitable for others. AfA anticipates the matching being done automatically but, if not, at least possible manually.

History

The concepts behind the AccessForAll framework were originally developed by the Adaptive Technology Resource Center at the University of Toronto. They were then worked on by the IMS Accessibility Working Group.1 The working group defined two specifications: the IMS Accessibility for Learner Information Package (AccLIP) and the IMS AccessForAll Meta-data [sp] Specification (AccMD). Together they defined what is currently the AccessForAll framework in an applied, XML-specific way that is suitable for users of IEEE LOM metadata.

Accessibility Description Set

An Accessibility Description Set is a set of metadata (statements) that describe in a machine-readable way the characteristics (Digital Resource Description - DRD) of the resource that affect how it can be sensed, understood, or interacted with by users or agents. Both resources, and the needs and preferences of persons, can have Accessibility Description Sets.

Access mode

An access mode is the human sense or medium though which a person receives the output of a resource. The mode refers to either the perceptual system, or the cognitive faculty engaged by the person. An access mode is defined either as a sense, to reference a perceptual system, or as a medium to connect with a cognitive ability. Some examples will clarify:

Describing a resource's access mode as "visual" implies that a person will use their eyes (visual sense) to process it. Pictorial and video resources are examples of such resources.

Describing a resource's access mode as "textual" implies that a person will rely on their ability to read in order to understand the resource's content2.

Alternative resource

A resource can be described as an alternative to another resource when the described resource is the same intellectual content of the referenced resource, but presented in another access mode.

AfA User Needs and Preferences Description Set

A person may at different times have different needs and preferences for resource accessibility. Their needs and preferences form a set of functional requirements that are expressed as accessibility description statements in a Personal Needs and Preferences (PNP) description set. DRD statements may contain access mode information about the relevant accessibility characteristics of the resources the person wishes to interact with.

Matching Resources to a User's Needs and Preferences

The main idea behind AfA is that if a user has a description of their accessibility needs and preferences, and is looking for resources that satisfy them, this can be done automatically by an application if those descriptions are expressed in a well-described metadata format. An example of how this might work is provided by The Inclusive Learning Exchange of the University of Toronto (http://www.barrierfree.ca/tile/).

Guidelines

See UserGuidelines

Relationship with Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG)

The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) are a set of principles and guidelines that define and explain the "requirements for making Web-based information and applications accessible to a wide range of people with disabilities."3 The WCAG does not define new technologies, but rather techniques that can be applied to any type of content accessed through the Web. The AccessForAll framework defines a complementary approach to resource accessibility: The AccessForAll Framework describes (via metadata on resources) the accessibility properties that are recommended by the WCAG. This enables the AccessForAll Framework to provide a means whereby resources can be matched to the needs and preferences of persons.

Acknowledgements

The following people have contributed to the development of AfA in a significant way:

<div class="tags">tags technorati : <a href="http://technorati.com/tag/accessibility" rel="tag">accessibility</a> <a href="http://technorati.com/tag/metadata" rel="tag">metadata</a> <a href="http://technorati.com/tag/AccessForAll" rel="tag">AccessForAll</a></div>