Subject: Human Computer Interaction

Assignment # 4

Submitted to:
Sir Talal

Submitted by:

Azka Khalid (11794 )

Zahra Abbas (11778)
Haiqa Suhail (11770)

BSSE -23 –A (M)

3/8/2020

0
URL: https://cust.edu.pk/

CUST UNIVERSITY ISLAMABAD.

EVALUATION BY ACCESSIBILITY STANDARD WCAG 2.0:

According to WCAG 2.0 website does not need to be interact using medium other than keyboard.

 This website does not meet the WCAG 2.0 criteria as this website is not operable to keyboard. It
does not support swiping of images and pages using keyboard. Although we can enter data
through keyboard.
 According to the second feature of wcag 2.0 website should not contain content that causes
seizure, but this website do have a lot of data that causes the website to stuck. This image was
stuck for solid 1 minute.

1. EVALUATION BY ACCESSIBILITY STANDARD WCAG 2.1:

1. This web site is perceivable in the following manner

 It provides the alternative for the text for example, in case of applying for admissions this
website provides an interactive way to apply for admissions apply online button at bottom of
the picture.

1
 It also provides other alternative for user to interact with multimedia and provide other options.
For example in case of user to open a youtube site of this university it is providing us with a
youtube icon.

2
 Content is presented in different ways for example we can apply for admissions online by
clicking on interactive picture (that is advertisement) with a button and it also provides us an
option to apply that is on home page

 Content is easy to see as the theme of this website is consistent through-out. Color blue, black
and white is making it visible to see the content.

2. this website is not operable because it does not come up to all standards of WCAG 2.1

 We cannot swipe images by using keyboard.it is only responsive to touch

 It is not giving user enough time to see the whole content as it switches very quickly from home
page to other page.

 We can easily find our way through the website. Clear instructions are given if we want to access
some feature on this website.
 We can only use this website using touch and stylus. It is irresponsive to keyboard as we can
only scroll down and up, but cannot swipe images using the keyboard.

3
This website is understandable because of following WCAG 2.1 criteria

 Website is readable as all text is understandable. We don’t have to spend a lot of time for
understanding the features of website as everything is clear and consistent.

 Content is operable in predictable ways. As it supports affordance. Button is working

properly and performing its task And all links and addresses are working properly.

4
  We can easily correct mistakes by going back to the previously consistent stage.

This website is Robust as it is compatible with the current and future tools.

SUGGESTIONS:

Most of the criteria features of WCAG 2.1 was met by this website. Few needs to be improved in
following manner.

 Website can be made operable as it should be responsive to input devices other then
keyboard. Pictures should be able to swap if we are using touch as input.
 It should give enough time to user to read the content on page before switching to the next
page.

Criteria for WCAG 2.0 was not met because we couldn’t input using keyboard and website had a
lot of data that caused seizures and user had to wait for data to be displayed.

Improvements can be made in following regards

 The website should not have any data that will cause the page to stuck.
 Website should allow the keyboard to perform all kind of necessary actions. we were
able to enter data but swiping the content using keyboard wasn’t working.

2. User Agent Accessibility Guidelines (UAAG):

The User Agent Accessibility Guidelines (UAAG) documents explain how to make user agents accessible
to people with disabilities. User agents include browsers, browser extensions, media players, readers
and other applications that render web content. Some accessibility needs are better met in the browser
than in the web content, such as text customization, preferences, and user interface accessibility. UAAG
is primarily for developers of Web browsers, browser extensions, media players, readers and other
applications that render web content.

UAAG and supporting resources are also intended to meet the needs of many different audiences,
including policy makers, managers, and others. For example:

 People who want to choose user agents that are more accessible can use UAAG to evaluate user
agents
 People who want to encourage their existing user agent developer to improve accessibility in
future versions can file bugs against UAAG or can refer the user agent vendor to UAAG.

i. Difficulty in reading for people with disabilities:

People with eyesight problems will find it difficult to read the content of the webpage.

5
 ii. Voice input and output:

In order to make the website more useable there must be voice input and output mechanism that must-
read whatever user enters and also must narrate the contents of the webpage to the user.

iii. Font Size of Create Account page:

The font size of the Login and create account page is too small that it is difficult for normal people to
read. It will cause a great difficulty for vision disabled people to use this.

6
 iv. Response Time of HEC Digital library in My Capital Menu:

The HEC Digital Library option in the My Capital menu takes too long to respond and is sort of dead page
because even after taking a long time nothing happens.

7
 v. No Navigation Map of the website:

In order to make the webpage more accessible and usable there must be a navigation map of the
website containing the location of pages and also record of dead pages. It will save the time of the user.

Suggestions:

i. There must be a text enlarger on the webpage.

ii. Voice input and output mechanism by means of microphone or speaker.
iii. Visible font size.
iv. Efficient response time of every page on web.
v. Website navigation map must appear on website.

3. Authoring tools accessibility guideline (ATAG)

Authoring tools are software and services that “authors” (web developers, designers, writers,
etc.) use to produce web content (static web pages, dynamic web applications, etc.). Examples
of authoring tools are listed below under “Who ATAG is for”.

The Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines (ATAG) documents explain how to:

 make the authoring tools themselves accessible, so that people with disabilities can create web
content, and
 help authors create more accessible web content — specifically: enable, support, and promote
the production of content that conforms to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG).

I. All functionality does not available from a keyboard. we cannot select any menu using key
board.

8
 II. Give users enough time to read and use content.

III. It does not Help users navigate and find content.

IV. It does not Help users  inputs other than keyboard.

V. It does not Help users avoid and correct mistakes.

VI. It does not Help user operate in predictable ways

VII. Ensure that web-based functionality is not accessible

9
VIII. Ensure that non-web-based functionality is accessible
IX. Ensure the availability of features that support the production of accessible content

10