2021
DOI: 10.1080/1941126x.2021.1988465
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Accessibility is not a feature: an analysis of common accessibility errors on academic library websites

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0
1

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
0
2
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Частичные подтверждения этому тезису мы находим в литературе. Так, например, показана и обоснована результатами исследований необходимость формирования компетенций ЦД библиотекарей электронных ресурсов (McCann, Peacock, 2021), веб-разработчиков и веб-дизайнеров (Gay et al, 2017;Rajšp et al, 2019), преподавателей высшего образования (Gilligan, 2020).…”
Section: Discussionunclassified
“…Частичные подтверждения этому тезису мы находим в литературе. Так, например, показана и обоснована результатами исследований необходимость формирования компетенций ЦД библиотекарей электронных ресурсов (McCann, Peacock, 2021), веб-разработчиков и веб-дизайнеров (Gay et al, 2017;Rajšp et al, 2019), преподавателей высшего образования (Gilligan, 2020).…”
Section: Discussionunclassified
“…Eric Ely assessed the prevalence of diversity, equity and inclusion statements on library websites and how these statements might help to position libraries as agents of social change (2021). In “Accessibility is not a feature: an analysis of common accessibility errors on academic library websites,” Shawn McCann and Rebeca Peacock used WAVE software to assess the accessibility of academic libraries' websites and discussed the five most common errors, suggesting libraries might want to develop processes for soliciting feedback from users with disabilities to improve their sites (2021).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Assessments of library websites and LibGuides typically focus on accessibility [ 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 ], which, while important, should be expanded to include a broader review for non-inclusive language. While a handful of papers report evaluations of libraries' disability webpages (specifically, the existence of a disability page and information on that page), none were found in the published literature that conducted a thorough assessment of the library website or LibGuides across multiple dimensions of inclusion, including language.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%