A Web Accessibility Evaluation of the Forest Road Evaluation Tool
For this project, I facilitated a partial accessibility evaluation of the Moscow Forestry Sciences Laboratory (MFSL)'s Forest Erosion Predictor Tool using WCAG 2.2 Guidelines. This tool utilizes the Water Erosion Prediction Project (WEPP) Model to predict soil erosion for forest roads.
I used the VPAT, Voluntary Product Accessibility Template, to document my evaluation. This template provides a standardized way to help buyers assess prospective information and communication technology (ICT) products for accessibility. The completed output of this template is called the Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR). For this evaluation, I focused on Conformance Levels A and AA, thus the partial nature of this assessment. Levels A and AA address the core requirements and barriers for users with disabilities.
A screenshot of the WEPP predictor tool and the WAVE checker when activated.
Scope & Method
The evaluation focused on the WEPP Road Erosion Predictor and Results pages. I filled out Table 1—Success Criteria Level A and Table 2—Success Criteria Level AA. Both include columns for the level of conformance and remarks. Within the remarks section, I have noted additional information, recommendations, and justification for non-conformance.
I used Google Chrome as the primary browser for the evaluation. However, testing across other popular browsers, such as Firefox, Safari, and Internet Explorer, is recommended to ensure compatibility and identify browser-specific accessibility issues. Aside from reviewing the console for code violations, I have also utilized the WAVE Evaluation Chrome Extension Tool by webAIM.org to aid my evaluation. I did not use any assistive technologies, such as screen readers, as these are more relevant to the Level AAA Criteria.
Results
Overall, the user interface and programmatic rendering of the WEPP Road Erosion Predictor page supports and partially supports the perceivable Conformance Levels A and AA. The webpage did not use any content that required adjustments such as timing changes, pausing, stopping, hiding, or even motion actuation; therefore, the “not applicable” conformance level was applied to related criteria. The webpage supports and partially supports the operable Conformance Levels A and AA. Some criteria were deemed not applicable. The evaluated pages, in majority, support and partially support the Conformance Levels A and AA specified the understandable principle. 3.3.4 Error Prevention (Legal, Financial, Data) (Level AA) and 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication (Minimum) (Level AA 2.2 only) are noted as not applicable as the website doesn’t have a legal or authentication step required.
Most criteria related to the robust principle are outlined in Success Criteria at Level AAA of the WCAG guidelines. While Level AAA strives for maximum accessibility, Level AA Conformance often meets legal requirements.
To ensure that the WEPP Road Erosion Predictor Page fully conforms with all the accessibility principles, three areas require more focus. First, designing the best user experience should be foundational to any application. Ensuring that users across all abilities can access the same information and functionality, and accomplish their goals. Second, ensure the content and user interface are consistent, clear, and delightful. Conforming with the organization’s brand guidelines, following a set style guide helps create a cohesive experience. Third, ensure that the website adheres to accessible coding practices. Start with the partially supported criteria and continue with all the recommendations noted in the Remarks column. Finally, testing the improvements across all users builds trust and enhances the product.
VPAT Assessment Table for Success Criteria, Level AA
Example Recommendations
Comparison of Current and Recommended Button Styles Following the US Forest Service
Using the appropriate element, attribute, and attribute type could also improve the page's accessibility.
For example, Adding table header <th>, <fieldset> for form grouping, using the <button> element instead of <input type=”submit”> to represent the button programmatically could help screen readers better understand the purpose and hierarchy of the content as indicated in criterion 1.3.1 Info and Relationships.
Recommended Button States Following the US Forest Services Style Guide
Repeated components on the website should appear and behave the same way. This pattern makes the experience more predictable and easily understandable.
Illustration of the Current and Recommended Focus Sequence
The image illustrates incorrect grouping and ordering of form content (red). Upon clicking the keyboard tab, the user is taken from the first title, Climate Station, to Soil Texture, whereas the expected and correct behavior should start from the Climate Station title, followed by the station selection. The code should equally represent the meaningful order of the form groups (green).