E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 4 (In chronological order)

From: Jennison Asuncion
Date: Thu, Mar 01 2007 5:20AM
Subject: development time and accessibility
No previous message | Next message →

(*Apologies for the cross-posting.)

Hello,

I am interested to here from folks who have actually gone through the
exercise of planning for, costing and implementing accessibility-related
activities into a web development project as part of their project's life
cycle. I was recently quoted a statistic thatstated that this activity
added 8 to 10% on a project's development time.

Does this statistic hold true?

Thanks,
Jennison

From: Roberto Modica
Date: Thu, Mar 01 2007 5:40AM
Subject: Re: development time and accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →

It all depends on the company; to be honest I see it as part of the general
workflow of my designs so I don't really charge any extra unless it is a
larger scale project and some more prolonged tests are required, but you
could argue this is part of testing more then accessibility. The reason
being is a lot of accessible features can be accomplished just through
general good practice of web development. There are "grey" areas such as if
you have a form of media that cannot be made accessible, video or other such
technology, then transcripts would have to be produced, but again this may
not fall to your web developer that content may have to be produced by you
and given to your developer to implement.

I honestly feel that accessibility is a tool for web developers and is
something we should learn, like we learnt CSS and XHTML. It should be part
of the general workflow of your web design. If it is a retrofit project,
then costs should be associated as you are then providing a direct service,
but not a new design.

Regards,

Rob

Roberto Modica
Modika Limited
www.modika.co.uk

From: Karl Groves
Date: Thu, Mar 01 2007 7:20AM
Subject: Re: development time and accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →

Jennison -

To be frank, I would hold any such statistic to be suspect. As we learn in
Logic 101 - "Generalized Statements Are Particularly False". It all depends
exactly what is included in the project. For example, if the site contains a
lot of multimedia content, then doing captioning and/ or transcripting of
audio and video files will certainly add considerably to the time it takes
to create that content.

In terms of development time, I think it comes down to two things: 1) Is
accessible production part of the company's internal development process? If
accessible production techniques are embedded into the development process
from the beginning, then any increase in development time is negligible. A
skilled developer should be able to create accessible interfaces as fast as
doing it the "inaccessible" way. 2) Is this *new* development? Naturally,
going in to make an existing product accessible after it has already been
fielded will add to development time because it may mean making the item
twice.

Even in the case of modifying existing code, I'd be reluctant to say what
sort of increase in time it would involve, because it depends on the
complexity of the interface. Again a skilled developer, knowledgeable in
accessibility, can make modifications in bulk rather quickly.

Karl L. Groves
User-Centered Design, Inc.
Office: 703-729-0998
Mobile: 443-889-8763
E-Mail: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Web: http://www.user-centereddesign.com

>

From: Jon Gunderson
Date: Fri, Mar 02 2007 8:00AM
Subject: Re: development time and accessibility
← Previous message | No next message

Accessible design saves money!

My experience on the UIUC campus is that current web development is very inefficient process in itself, since most web developers have never been formally trained as web developers and only eclecticly understand the web therough the authoring tools they happen to use and the coding techniques they copy from people they know or like.

Developers without much training in web technology use poor inline styling and image techniques that require a lot of manual editing of each page to maintain any level of consistency between pages. At UIUC we are piggy backing accessibility on top of web standards using CSS. Most web developers after they learn these html+css techniques are thanking us because it is so much easier for them to create and maintain websites. So I would argue that accessibility actually saves money, although there is the initial time for web developers to learn web standards based design techniques. But the efficiencies gained from this learning saves money in the long run and makes it easier for people to upgrade the look and feel of websites or support new web technologies without having to do extensive rewrites.

Some quotes from real web developers on campus:

==========================================================Quote #1

Accessible web designs are more easily maintained than non accessible ones because standards compliance and good separation of content (html) and style (css) make adapting to future browsers and technologies easier. They are also more usable in different devices (Cell Phones, PDA, printer friendly pages, etc) and broader audiences including blind, visually impaired, color blind, those with slow internet connections or older computers, and those with hearing and motor impairments. Accessible designs give better search engine rankings for your site. The techniques used to make a site more accessible also make it much cheaper and quicker to change the look and feel of a website.


Retrofitting a web site for accessibility is much more costly than making a site accessible from the beginning, simply because the work has to be done a second time. The costs of retrofitting accessibility are both in the content areas of the individual web pages and the. In many sites with simple template designs, templates can be redesigned for accessibility and the changes easily propagated to all pages in the site. Then accessibility changes to the content areas of the site must be done on a page by page basis and involve training all the content authors for the site and having them pick through the content areas of each page of the site. In sites with more complicated template designs, the content areas of the pages and templates are interwoven such that both the templates and the content areas must be retrofitted on a page by page basis; a time consuming process. In these cases it makes more sense to wait until the website is ready for its next redesign or simply use the accessibility retrofit as an occasion for a complete redesign.


John Barclay
College of Education
Webmaster


------------------------------------------------------------
Quote #2

Since taking the “Universally Design Worskshop” seminar, my whole perception of what an “accessible web page”is, has changed. Before taking the seminar, the term “accessible web page” left me with a very negative connotation. As a web designer, I was sure that meant black text on a white background with no images, let alone any design features.

After taking your seminar and talking with you, I now know different! An “accessible web page” does not mean it will interfere with my “design” or how I want my page to look. By following some simple rules and maintaining the proper markup, I feel like I’m just “doing it the right way”.

It’s also been much easier than I thought, and I feel good about the fact that my web pages will now be accessible to so many more people.



Karen Edwards
Assistant Director, Design Group @Vet Med

--------------------------------------------------------------
Quote #3

In an effort to create accessible web designs, I learned the ins and outs of CSS and web standards. The time investment in both of these areas has paid off tenfold as the sites I am creating now are more accessible and easy to maintain than ever before. Through online communities, books, presentations, etc., learning about CSS and web standards can be relatively easy and painless. Accessibility is extremely important and I glad I took the time to learn more about it.

Doug Burgett
Creative Director
Office of Communications for Enrollment Management

-------------------------------------------------------------
Quote #4

" Developing using the CITES/DRES Web Accessibility Best Practices has allowed me to insure that my sites are stable and accessible for the widest possible audience. This investment of time and money gives my unit the greatest ROI for not only the present but also the future. These Best Practices help our pages pay for themselves by not requiring continual design overhaul."

"Using the CITES/DRES Web Accessibility Best Practices helps us get the greatest return for our web investment by guiding us through code and accessibility compliance. This insures our pages will be stable, available to the widest possible audience, and adaptable to future code and CMS requirements. Adhering to this set of Best Practice guidelines has been a very wise investment of our time and energy."

"The CITES/DRES Web Accessibility Best Practices have given me, as a web designer, a solid set of criteria whereby I can insure that my unit's web pages are cross-platform compatible, accessible, and code compliant. This gives their investment in the unit web presence the greatest possible return for both ease of maintenance and also adaptability for present and future requirements. Working with these guidelines has been time and money well spent."

Tim Offenstein

======================================================
Jon


---- Original message ----
>Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2007 06:55:58 -0500
>From: "Bill Killam" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>Subject: RE: [UACCESS-L] development time and accessibility
>To: "'Gregg Vanderheiden'" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >, "'Jennison Asuncion'" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >, < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >, "'Equal Access to Software & Information'" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >, "'WebAIM Discussion List'" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>
>I agree with Gregg. Remediation is much more costly than coding it
>correctly in the first place. I'm not sure the difference is even that high
>- maybe 5%.
>
>Bill
>-------------------------------------------------------
>Bill Killam, MA CHFP
>President, User-Centered Design, Inc.
>20548 Deerwatch Place
>Ashburn, VA 20147
>email: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>Work/Fax: (703) 729-0998
>Mobile: (703) 626-6318
>Web: www.user-centereddesign.com
>
>
>