BlogAutomatic or manual web accessibility validation?
Automatic or manual web accessibility validation?
David E. Cedeño (Fundador y director de Discapacidad Cero)
11 January 2022
Web accessibility validation is key when it comes to guaranteeing access to websites for everyone. And this is even truer today, where this requirement is driven by regulations such as Royal Decree 1112/2018.
But what type of validation should be used when working with web accessibility? Continue reading to find out.
There are a number of tools that allow you toautomatically evaluate web accessibility, with the aim being to quickly detect any errors in the website’s code. However, the very nature of this kind of tool means that it is difficult to fully check whether the web page is really accessible or not. This is because many issues or coding errors are not processed automatically and need to be detected manually.
These professionals are really the only ones who are able to interpret theaccessibility errors that are automatically detected; they will also be able to manually identify any errors that might have gone undetected by automatic analysis. Furthermore, they are the ones who can best advise and help you resolve all detected errors in order to comply with accessibility regulations quickly and easily.
Automatic evaluation tools are our best allies when they are employed in combination with other actions, resulting in true web accessibility. Automatic evaluation tools considerablyreduce the time and effort needed once in-depth evaluation has been performed.
This allows us to better detect and minimize accessibility barriers that may exist on a web page, which in turn has a direct impact on the general quality of the site.
A complement to accessibility evaluation and not a complete analysis
It is important to understand that automatic validations are not infallible. On the contrary, there are certain limitations to what they can do when running the required analyses.
Moreover, they can falsely detect certain errors which then need to be analysed, corrected, or discarded by an expert. That is why we recommend that users understand how these automatic accessibility evaluation tools work, as well as their advantages and disadvantages.
In this sense, it is essential to rely on the experience of an expert who can analyse how such tools behave vis-à-vis any accessibility problems that arise.
Differences between manual and automatic accessibility evaluation
To help you understand the advantages and disadvantages of manual and automatic accessibility validations, we have prepared a list of characteristics to take into account whenevaluating web accessibility.
This must be carried out by a team of experts who are able to identify errors and propose corrections in accordance with all the guidelines, regulations, and requirements of accessibility, usability, and website quality.
This type of validation allows for the application of data collection techniques on the part of users, which must be manually reviewed and evaluated.
To find a greater number of errors, this type of website analysis requires greater effort and time.
Greater reliability and more detail in the errors found.
The analyses performed are more comprehensive and exhaustive.
This type of service is software-based, automatically analysing web accessibility within a given period of time.
Can be executed as often as needed and allows for continuous monitoring without human intervention.
Detection limited to automatic issues, without applying the criteria of an accessibility expert.
Can cover a large number of web pages or sections, enabling data collection.
Once you understand the characteristics of each type of website accessibility validation tool, it is important to understand the relevance of implementing both types, each complementing the other.
It is important to understand that if you combine these two validation methods, you will obtain more detailed, richer information, allowing experts to propose effective website accessibility solutions.
Which criteria should be reviewed manually, and which can be reviewed automatically?
As a general rule, we could say that only 20% of the WCAG 2.1 Level AA criteria can be reliably evaluated automatically. However, there are some criteria that can be met using semi-automated procedures. This facilitates evaluation and notably reduces the effort required in a manual review.
It’s time to audit your website!Contact us and learn about all the benefits of a web accessibility audit offered by inSuit and its 360 services. ¡No purchase necessary!
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
El almacenamiento o acceso técnico es necesario para la finalidad legítima de almacenar preferencias no solicitadas por el abonado o usuario.
El almacenamiento o acceso técnico que es utilizado exclusivamente con fines estadísticos.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.