Describing and Assessing Image Descriptions for Visually Impaired Web Users with IDAT
01 Jan 2013-Vol. 179, pp 27-37
TL;DR: The Image Description Assessment Tool (IDAT) is proposed, a Java-based tool containing some proposed heuristics for assessing how well an image description matches the real content of the image on the web.
Abstract: People with visual impairments, particularly blind people face alot of difficulties browsing the web with assistive technologies such as screen readers, when websites do not conform to accessibility standards and are thus inaccessible. HTML is the basic language for website design but its ALT attribute on the IMG element does not adequately capture comprehensive image semantics and description in a way that can be accurately interpreted by screen readers, hence blind people do not usually get the complete description of the image. Most of the problems however arise from web designers and developers not including a description of an image or not comprehensively describing these images to people with visual impairments. In this paper, we propose the use of the Image Description Assessment Tool (IDAT), a Java-based tool containing some proposed heuristics for assessing how well an image description matches the real content of the image on the web. The tool also contains a speech interface which can enable a visually impaired individual to listen to the description of an image that has been uploaded unto the system.
Citations
More filters
180 citations
TL;DR: This paper surveys accessibility literature and presents a general overview of the primary challenges of accessibility barriers on websites, including standards and guidelines (WCAG 2.0), during website’s design and development and during evaluation.
Abstract: Despite the importance of web accessibility in recent years, websites remain partially or completely inaccessible to certain sectors of the population. This is due to several reasons, including web developers’ little or no experience in accessibility and the lack of accurate information about the best ways to quickly and easily identify accessibility problems using different Accessibility Evaluation Methods (AEMs). This paper surveys accessibility literature and presents a general overview of the primary challenges of accessibility barriers on websites. In this sense, we critically investigate main challenges forms related to accessibility including standards and guidelines (WCAG 2.0), during website’s design and development and during evaluation. Finally, a set of recommendations such as enforcing accessibility legislations are presented to overcome some challenges.
28 citations
Cites background from "Describing and Assessing Image Desc..."
...Nevertheless, few web designers follow accessibility guidelines [42]....
[...]
TL;DR: Journal publishers prefer to publish articles online in the portable document format (PDF), which may pose accessibility challenges when guidelines such as WCAG 2.0 are not adhered to, but documents from Research in Developmental Disabilities documents were generally more accessible.
25 citations
07 Jul 2014
TL;DR: The resultant ONTODAPS system is introduced, including the methodology developed to design the system, its architecture and evaluation by 30 disabled students, and the results of the usability evaluation are presented.
Abstract: The increasing use of technology to enhance learning means both disabled students and higher education institutions face the challenge of adapting technology to meet the educational and special needs of students. As most e-learning systems are not designed to meet special needs, it is imperative to look for newer ways of designing e-learning systems to ensure that they are disability-aware and meet their assistive technology needs. In this light, this paper summarizes the result of research to seek better ways of enhancing learning for disabled students. Here, the resultant ONTODAPS system is introduced, including the methodology developed to design the system, its architecture and evaluation by 30 disabled students. The results of the usability evaluation are presented and discussed. It is hoped that researchers, instructional designers and developers of e-learning systems would look to this paper to gain insight into the design and development of disability-aware e-learning systems that will ensure that they are both accessible and usable to disabled students.
16 citations
Cites background from "Describing and Assessing Image Desc..."
...With the semantic web, knowledge can be represented in a meaningful way that could not be achieved with simple HTML[2]....
[...]
28 Jul 2015
TL;DR: This paper employs AI to show how specific learning materials from a huge repository of learning materials can be recommended to learners with various disabilities through employing semantic web technology to model the learner and their needs.
Abstract: Current efforts towards including students with disabilities in web-based higher education are well established However, existing learning environments are not fully inclusive, particularly for those with multiple disabilities Most learning environments built for students with disabilities limit themselves to meeting the needs of specific disabilities and do not attempt to scale up to the difficulties of designing for those with multiple disabilities This paper seeks to address how virtual learning environments (VLEs) can be designed to include the needs of learners with multiple disabilities Specifically, it employs AI to show how specific learning materials from a huge repository of learning materials can be recommended to learners with various disabilities This is made possible through employing semantic web technology to model the learner and their needs Three techniques are discussed to combine requirements Simple logical operators, knowledge based rules, and machine learning based rule induction are combined in this integrated approach It is hoped that developers of e-learning systems will be encouraged from this approach to design fully inclusive virtual learning environments
16 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: This paper describes a mechanism for defining ontologies that are portable over representation systems, basing Ontolingua itself on an ontology of domain-independent, representational idioms.
12,962 citations
01 Jan 2001
8,347 citations
"Describing and Assessing Image Desc..." refers background in this paper
...The semantic web [11] is more meaningful and can enable machines to understand information and to communicate with each other in ways that have not been possible before....
[...]
01 Jan 2004
TL;DR: This document provides an introduction to OWL by informally describing the features of each of the sublanguages of OWL, the Web Ontology Language by providing additional vocabulary along with a formal semantics.
Abstract: The OWL Web Ontology Language is designed for use by applications that need to process the content of information instead of just presenting information to humans. OWL facilitates greater machine interpretability of Web content than that supported by XML, RDF, and RDF Schema (RDF-S) by providing additional vocabulary along with a formal semantics. OWL has three increasingly-expressive sublanguages: OWL Lite, OWL DL, and OWL Full. This document is written for readers who want a first impression of the capabilities of OWL. It provides an introduction to OWL by informally describing the features of each of the sublanguages of OWL. Some knowledge of RDF Schema is useful for understanding this document, but not essential. After this document, interested readers may turn to the OWL Guide for more detailed descriptions and extensive examples on the features of OWL. The normative formal definition of OWL can be found in the OWL Semantics and Abstract Syntax. Status of this document OWL Web Ontology Language Overview https://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/ 1 de 14 09/05/2017 08:32 a.m. This document has been reviewed by W3C Members and other interested parties, and it has been endorsed by the Director as a W3C Recommendation. W3C's role in making the Recommendation is to draw attention to the specification and to promote its widespread deployment. This enhances the functionality and interoperability of the Web. This is one of six parts of the W3C Recommendation for OWL, the Web Ontology Language. It has been developed by the Web Ontology Working Group as part of the W3C Semantic Web Activity (Activity Statement, Group Charter) for publication on 10 February 2004. The design of OWL expressed in earlier versions of these documents has been widely reviewed and satisfies the Working Group's technical requirements. The Working Group has addressed all comments received, making changes as necessary. Changes to this document since the Proposed Recommendation version are detailed in the change log. Comments are welcome at public-webont-comments@w3.org (archive) and general discussion of related technology is welcome at www-rdf-logic@w3.org (archive). A list of implementations is available. The W3C maintains a list of any patent disclosures related to this work. This section describes the status of this document at the time of its publication. Other documents may supersede this document. A list of current W3C publications and the latest revision of this technical report can be found in the W3C technical reports index at http://www.w3.org/TR/.
4,147 citations
01 Jan 2010
TL;DR: The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) pursues four main objectives: Web for everyone; Web on everything; advanced data searching and sharing; and trust and confidence.
Abstract: The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) was founded as an industry consortium in 1994, five years after the establishment of the World Wide Web (WWW). After the first International WWW Conference in May 1994, the formal establishment of the W3C followed on 1 October 1994, founded by Berners-Lee in collaboration with CERN at the MIT Laboratory for Computer Science (MIT/LCS). W3C members enjoy the right to elect a seat on the Advisory Committee. Moreover, they have access to member-only information and are involved in the member submission process. W3C possesses an advisory entity in the form of its Advisory Board, which is generally appointed by the W3C Team. W3C is financially self-supporting. W3C is constantly challenged by the quick evolution of Internet technology. The W3C pursues four main objectives: Web for everyone; Web on everything; advanced data searching and sharing; and trust and confidence. Keywords: International WWW Conference; internet technology; World Wide Web (WWW); World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
897 citations
TL;DR: A model for the exploitation of ontology-based knowledge bases to improve search over large document repositories and is combined with conventional keyword-based retrieval to achieve tolerance to knowledge base incompleteness.
Abstract: Semantic search has been one of the motivations of the semantic Web since it was envisioned. We propose a model for the exploitation of ontology-based knowledge bases to improve search over large document repositories. In our view of information retrieval on the semantic Web, a search engine returns documents rather than, or in addition to, exact values in response to user queries. For this purpose, our approach includes an ontology-based scheme for the semiautomatic annotation of documents and a retrieval system. The retrieval model is based on an adaptation of the classic vector-space model, including an annotation weighting algorithm, and a ranking algorithm. Semantic search is combined with conventional keyword-based retrieval to achieve tolerance to knowledge base incompleteness. Experiments are shown where our approach is tested on corpora of significant scale, showing clear improvements with respect to keyword-based search
456 citations
"Describing and Assessing Image Desc..." refers background in this paper
...Semantic web technologies can overcome the limitations of information retrieval using keyword-based methods [14] as it makes information more meaningful to people by making it more meaningful to machines [15]....
[...]