AE DENIED
BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION
FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
The Center for
Accessible
Technology
Published February 2015
AE DENIED
BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION
FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
Published January 2015
Written by Susan Mizner and Eric Smith
Additional contributors: The Center for Accessible Technology, Eunice Rho, Diana Scholl, Claudia Center
THE AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION is a nationwide, nonprofit, nonpartisan
organization dedicated to the principles of liberty and equality embodied in the
U.S. Constitution and the laws of the United States.
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS
SUSAN N. HERMAN, President
ANTHONY D. ROMERO, Executive Director
Gary Williams, Vice President
Robert Remar, Vice President, Secretary, Treasurer
Philippa Strum, Secretary
NATIONAL OFFICE
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor
New York, NY 10004
(212) 549-2500
www.aclu.org
Cover photo: WorldBank/Creative Commons
Contents
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................... 2
The Importance of Accessible Online Voter Registration ........................................ 6
Common Online Barriers for People with Disabilities............................................. 8
Report Card....................................................................................................................16
Access Issues Explained ............................................................................................. 20
1. Inaccessible Forms and Screen Reader Access....................................... 21
2. Failure to Use Accessible Coding Language
..............................................22
3. Skip Navigation .............................................................................................26
4. Alt (Alternative) Text for Images..................................................................28
5. Keyboard Accessibility..................................................................................31
6. Color Contrast ...............................................................................................32
7. Text Size and Scaling ....................................................................................34
8. Tab Order........................................................................................................35
State-by-State Review .................................................................................................36
•
California ........................................................................................................38
•
Utah.................................................................................................................39
•
Minnesota.......................................................................................................42
•
Kansas ............................................................................................................44
•
Ohio .................................................................................................................46
•
Missouri..........................................................................................................48
Appendix A: Web Accessibility Glossary....................................................................52
Appendix B: States with Online Voter Registration
.................................................56
Appendix C: Recommended Evaluation Criteria......................................................58
Endnotes.........................................................................................................................60
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
Executive Suary
There is growing consensus on the many advantages of online voter registration.
1
For election officials, the online efficiencies translate into reduced administrative
burdens, increased accuracy of data, and potentially millions of dollars in
cost savings.
2
For eligible voters, an online voter registration system is quick,
convenient, and accurate. Perhaps most
importantly, according to the Social
Science Research Council, “while about
51 million eligible adults, or about one in
One in five people
four U.S. citizens, are not registered to
vote,
3
the evidence is clear that online voter
eligible to vote has a
registration is helping to increase voter
disability.
franchise and build a more robust and
vibrant democracy.”
4
This report focuses on one urgent issue: the accessibility of online voter
registration websites for voters with disabilities.
There are two reasons that online voter registration sites must be accessible:
1. It is a good idea: People with disabilities constitute 19 percent of eligible
voters.
5
Those most likely to experience barriers online are people with visual
disabilities, cognitive disabilities (such as traumatic brain injury), learning
disabilities, and limited mobility of arms and hands. For many, online registration
would remove the need for a time-consuming and burdensome trip to the
Department of Motor Vehicles.
2. It is the law: Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires all
state and local government entities to ensure that people with disabilities have
equal access to government programs and services. The ADA also requires
equally effective communication.
6
An online voter registration system is such
a program and service, and the information it communicates must be equally
available to people with disabilities.
2
Photo: Shutterstock
So, what is an accessible website? An accessible website is one that allows all
users to access its information, navigate with ease, and interact as needed. For
example, an accessible website accomplishes the following:
•
It allows people with visual disabilities to use screen readers, which
translate the text and navigation features on the website to speech.
•
It allows people with limited hand or arm mobility to navigate the site
without having to use a mouse, but through the use of a keyboard or voice
commands.
•
It provides people with hearing disabilities, or certain processing
disabilities, with a written version of auditory content.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 3
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
The ACLU partnered with the Center for Accessible Technology, nationally
recognized experts on website accessibility standards and assistive technology
for people with disabilities, to assess the accessibility of online voter registration
websites. The Center for Accessible Technology briefly evaluated disability access
for all 20 states that offered online registration in May 2014,
7
and it conducted
more in-depth reviews of California, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, and
Utah’s sites.
8
The results? There’s bad news and
good news:
The changes needed…
The bad news: Only one online voter
are both inexpensive
registration site in the country—
California’s—is fully accessible to
and relatively
people with disabilities, and most
state sites do not meet even minimal
straightforward.
standards of accessibility.
The good news: The changes needed to make most voter registration websites
accessible are both inexpensive and relatively straightforward. Furthermore,
the steps needed to make websites accessible to people with disabilities tend to
improve the user experience for everyone.
This report lists the most common problems, ranging from issues that completely
bar a user with a disability from being able to access the site to issues that pose
significant hurdles to use.
Of the common problems, these are the most serious:
1. Inaccessible forms
On all but one of the state sites reviewed, the most important portion of the
website—the online voter registration form itself—was inaccessible to people
who use screen readers. (Screen readers are a simple technology that translates
text to speech for people with visual disabilities, dyslexia, or other cognitive
disabilities.) Because the forms were not properly coded, people who use screen
readers would find it difficult or even impossible to know if information such as
their name or address was entered into the proper fields.
4
2. Poor navigation between pages on the website
All but the California and Utah websites were structured in a way that makes
it burdensome and confusing to navigate with a screen reader. Proper coding
allows a user to move between screens without getting lost or confused in the
process.
3. Inaccessible images
People who are blind or low vision cannot view an image on a site. They rely on
coding (called alternative text, or “alt text”) that explains what an image is. The
majority of sites either did not provide this information or provided it incorrectly.
4. Poor website design
Some states designed their sites in ways that created obstacles for both users
with and without disabilities. These design flaws include using insufficient
contrast between text and background color, using small text that fails to
enlarge clearly, and using sophisticated and complicated language where simple
sentences would do.
This report is a tool for election officials and computer programmers to design
accessible voter registration websites. It details common errors in online voter
registration sites and highlights best practices for website designers. It includes
both basic information for the lay reader and detailed instructions for the expert
coder.
Making websites accessible will improve the voting process for everyone.
Moreover, at least one study has shown that making websites accessible will
enable states to save money.
9
By implementing the recommendations included in
this report, states and localities will ensure that all eligible voters will have the
opportunity to participate in our democracy without unnecessary barriers.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 5
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
The Importance of
Aeible Online Voter
Registration
Historically, people with disabilities have faced enormous barriers to exercising
their right to vote. Inaccessible polling locations and voting machines—as well
as wholesale disenfranchisement of people with certain types of disabilities—
have discouraged, and at times prevented, many citizens with disabilities from
participating fully in the voting process.
The Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002 moved the United States a giant step
forward in removing barriers to the vote. With the requirement of accessible
polling places and accessible voting machines, HAVA promised full access
to the ballot for people who had previously been unable to vote privately and
independently. The ADA
has also established the
clear right of people with
State and local governments
disabilities to equal access—
especially equal access to
must ensure they are not
government services. Title
II of the ADA requires state
creating barriers…for people
and local government entities
to ensure that people with
with disabilities.
disabilities have an equal
opportunity to participate in
or benefit from all government programs, activities, and services. To fulfill this
mandate, governments may need to make reasonable modifications to policies,
practices, or procedures, or provide auxiliary aids and services.
In short, state and local governments must ensure they are not creating
barriers—even unintentional ones—for people with disabilities.
6
Multiple states now provide for online voter registration.
The Internet plays a central role in connecting Americans to information,
government services, and opportunities for civic engagement. Just as physical
accessibility means that people with disabilities can reach a sidewalk using a
curb ramp or enter a building with an automatic door opener, web accessibility
ensures that people with disabilities can perceive, understand, navigate, and
interact with digital information.
As more of the political process moves online, state governments need to ensure
that people with disabilities are not left behind. When the web is accessible,
many people with disabilities can communicate, interact, and participate online
more easily than they can in the physical world. Online voter registration can, if
done correctly, be an enormous service to many people with disabilities.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 7
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
Coon Online Baiers
for People with
Disabilities
About one in ten potential voters needs an
accessible website. Barriers to the Internet
are most frequent for the 8.1 million
Americans who have difficulty seeing,
the 6.7 million people who have difficulty
grasping objects such as a mouse or typing
on a keyboard, and the approximately
10.6 million adults who have some type of
cognitive or learning disability.
10
The spectrum of disability experiences
is extremely broad. The following is an
overview of some of the most common
barriers people with disabilities
experience in using the Internet. While
not comprehensive, the review should
provide a basic understanding of the
8.1 million Americans
usual ways people with disabilities can
best access the web.
have vision disabilities.
Photo: Thinkstock
People with Visual Disabilities
People with visual disabilities are generally divided into two groups: those with
limited vision (“low vision users”), and those with no vision (“blind users”). Both
groups are legally blind, and both may use a computer with different types of
assistive technology.
8
Low Vision Users
Most low vision users rely on enlarging the images and text on their computer
monitor to see a website. To do this, one can set the print size to large or use
screen magnification software. It is not uncommon for a low vision user to need
to magnify the screen so that only one-sixth or one-eighth of a typical screen is
visible at a time. Much of an enlarged screen is out of view, so a user must move
the screen around to see all of the text. Setting the screen to this level can make
the text readable, but it can be very disorienting and hard to navigate, with these
users often “swimming” around the screen, trying to find key content.
Screen magnifier software makes the screen visible for people with low vision, but
the screen can show only a portion of the webpage at a time.
Image: Rich Robinson
Low vision users often encounter the following challenges when browsing the web:
•
Long lines of text. These require scrolling many “screens” across to read
and then traveling back to start the next line. This makes it hard to find the
start of the next line, as it is often far off screen to the left.
•
Inconsistent placement of navigation items. As low vision users can see
only a small portion of the screen at any one time, they often have to hunt for
navigation items, especially when they are not placed in standard locations.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 9
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
•
Inconsistent placement of key interface elements. If critical information,
such as form “submit” buttons, is placed in the far right corner or the
bottom of the screen, it makes the buttons difficult to locate. Moreover,
screen magnification users often miss content on the right side of the
screen. Critical information should be in the left or middle area of the
screen instead.
Blind Users
Blind users generally access computers with screen reader software. Screen
readers convert print on the screen into a spoken, synthesized voice. (Screen
readers can also connect with machines that translate the text to Braille for
those who read Braille, but a synthesized voice is more commonly used).
Screen reader software has the potential to allow a blind user access to
everything on the web. However, it relies on the web designer to build the site
in a way that the screen reader can “read” the information. Screen readers are
extremely smart—but they are not “mind readers.” They can read text and code,
but they cannot read images. So, for example, a screen reader cannot translate
the contents of a photograph or a map. It cannot even read the words “Secretary
of State” if they are part of an image and not text.
The header for the Minnesota Secretary of State’s webpage is an image. It includes
Mark Ritchie’s photo, the state seal, and the words “Office of the Minnesota
Secretary of State Mark Ritchie.” A screen reader cannot read the photo or the
words in it. But it can read an “alt tag” describing the image in text so that the user
understands the significance of the image (the “alt tag” is shown below in green).
10
Blind users face several important challenges when using the web:
•
Images that are unlabeled. These are therefore unreadable by the screen
reader. For example, on a form in which the “submit” button is an image,
the screen reader cannot convey to the user what the button does, and
therefore the user will not know how to submit the form. Unless that image
is properly labeled with text for the screen reader, it is useless to a blind
reader.
•
Websites that require the use of a
mouse. Because blind users cannot
Screen readers are
see to move a cursor on a screen,
they typically use only the keyboard
smart—but they are
for navigation. Many websites do
not permit keyboard users the same
not “mind readers.”
access to the site’s functionality.
Some sites use keyboard shortcuts
that interfere with screen readers’ keyboard commands. For example, if a
website has the image of a map and tells the user to click on a county, it
may be impossible for the screen reader to find the point on which to click.
•
Websites that are poorly designed and structured. Using a screen reader
can be tedious without good design. A sighted user can see an entire
webpage within a few seconds, focus on the area of top interest, and click
directly on that section to proceed. Blind users cannot do that. Instead, they
have to listen as the screen reader reads through what is on the screen
from top to bottom.
A well-designed website uses a computer language called semantic HTML
to provide quick keys to the structure of the page. For example:
 The page heading is properly coded so that the screen reader can
convey that the user is on the Ohio Voter Registration page as opposed
to the New York Voter Registration page.
 The contents of the page are quickly and easily located.
 The form fields are labeled so the user knows which box to type in each
piece of information.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 11
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
People with Mobility Disabilities
People with upper-body mobility disabilities range from those who have mild
difficulty with fine motor control, making the use of a mouse difficult, to those
who have no use of their arms or hands at all. For many, using a keyboard and
mouse presents a challenge.
Some people with limited mobility in their upper body use mouth sticks to use a
computer.
Photo: DNWallace
Many people with mobility disabilities use one or a combination of the following:
•
A mouth stick to control their computer.
•
Voice recognition software that allows them to use their voice to direct their
computer’s keystrokes.
•
A keyboard only (without a mouse).
Basic aspects of accessible design for these users include minimizing the
number of clicks needed to get to key information and organizing a site’s contents
in a logical manner.
12
Speech recognition technology allows people with hand or upper-body limitations
to use a computer through verbal commands. Here, Vernon Cox, who has had
quadriplegia since childhood, uses speech recognition technology instead of the
mouth-held typing stick he used in years past.
Photo: John O’Hara/San Francisco Chronicle
People with Cognitive or Learning Disabilities
People with cognitive or learning disabilities are the largest and most diverse
group of people with disabilities who need access to the web. Such individuals
may have difficulty processing written language, images, speech, or numbers.
Cognitive disabilities include autism, Down syndrome, traumatic brain injury, and
dementia, while learning disabilities include attention deficit disorder, dyslexia,
and dyscalculia (difficulty with numbers).
To access information on the web, people with a cognitive or learning disability
may use several technologies at the same time. Someone who has difficulty
reading may use a screen reader that highlights text plus synthesized speech to
facilitate comprehension, while someone with an auditory processing disability
may use captions to help understand an audio track.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 13
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
This is an example of the use of a combination of illustrations, graphics, and text
to communicate key ideas.
11
Many people with cognitive or learning disabilities
benefit from this approach.
Barriers that people with cognitive or learning disabilities encounter on websites
include the following:
•
Use of unnecessarily complex language
•
Lack of graphics
•
Lack of clear or consistent organization
•
Lack of alternative information sources on webpages, such as alternative
text that can be converted to audio to supplement visuals, or captions
for audio
•
Distracting visual or audio elements that cannot be turned off easily
•
Use of visual or audio frequencies that can trigger seizures
14
Photo: Shutterstock
Other Groups Affected by Website Accessibility
Seniors, People with Limited English Proficiency, People with Limited Literacy
Many people who do not identify as having a disability are also affected by
inaccessible website design, such as seniors, people with limited English
proficiency, and people with limited literacy.
•
Seniors often experience
a loss of mobility, limited
eyesight, and minor
cognitive issues. They also
tend to have less experience
with using the Internet and
navigating a website.
•
People with limited English
proficiency or limited
literacy may find complex
words and sentence
structures challenging.
For all audiences, the Center
for Accessible Technology
recommends the following:
•
Use clear, direct language.
•
Use interface elements that are supported by pictures, icons, or symbols.
•
Have a consistent layout for the site with unique page titles.
A website that is well designed for people with disabilities will be a website that is
easier to use for everyone. A well-designed website is an accessible website.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 15
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
Report Card
Overview
At the ACLU’s request, the Center for Accessible Technology (CforAT) conducted
a review of online voter registration sites in May and June 2014. The goal was to
gauge the accessibility of these websites for users with disabilities as well as to
identify best practices where they existed. In evaluating websites, CforAT uses the
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0, conformance level AA, as its
baseline to assess accessibility, but it also conducts user testing with people who
have a variety of disabilities so as to include real-life experience and interaction
in its evaluations.
12
This section of the report provides an
overview of how the states fared.
State governments are,
CforAT briefly reviewed all 20 states
that had online voter registration as
as a whole, doing an
of May 2014 and selected six states
for a more in-depth review. These six
abysmal job providing
states were:
accessible voter
•
California
registration websites.
•
Utah
•
Minnesota
•
Kansas
•
Ohio
•
Missouri
Of these, California’s online voter registration site was the only one that passed
all the tests. A brief look at the remaining 14 states with online voter registration
showed similar access issues repeated over and over again.
16
The results of the review provide both good and bad news: The bad news is that
state governments are, as a whole, doing an abysmal job of providing fully
accessible voter registration websites to the public. The vast majority of states
that have implemented online voter registration are inadvertently barring people
with disabilities, and screen reader users in particular, from making use of
this new approach to voter registration. Overall, the accessibility of online voter
registration is quite poor, and virtually all of the websites that CforAT examined
have significant barriers that would make the sites unusable for many people
with disabilities.
The good news is that the majority of the access barriers are quite easy
to correct. Most of these websites can be brought up to decent accessibility
standards without great expense and within a fairly short period of time.
Most Common Access Issues
Of the six states that the Center for Accessible Technology reviewed in detail,
the accessibility ranged from beautifully accessible (California) to extremely
inaccessible (Missouri). With the exception of California, all the states failed the
most basic form of accessibility: access for screen readers.
States routinely failed on “skip navigation,” which allows users relying on
accessible technology to navigate a webpage quickly. Less frequently, but
importantly, some states also had challenges with “text scaling.” This allows
users to change the size of the text on the page and is especially important for
low vision users. In particular, Missouri failed to provide a logical “tab order.” This
refers to how the cursor moves when the user presses the tab key, and it is an
especially important feature for users who cannot use a mouse.
The most troubling barrier, however, given the purpose of online registration
sites, was the inaccessibility of the actual voter registration forms. State sites
also had barriers to navigating through the site, understanding the images on the
site, and being able to see the text clearly.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 17
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
Table 1 below summarizes how each state fared for the access issues tested:
TABLE 1
California
Utah
Minnesota
Kansas
Ohio
Missouri
Forms
Pass Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail
Screen reader
access
Pass Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail
Semantic
organization
Pass Pass Fail Fail Fail Fail
Skip navigation
Pass Pass Fail Fail Fail Fail
Alt text
Pass Fail Pass Fail Fail Fail
Keyboard access
Pass Pass Pass Pass Fail Fail
Contrast
Pass Fail Pass Fail Pass Pass
Text size and
scaling
Pass Pass Pass Pass Fail Fail
Tab order
Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Fail
Note: The access issues listed above are explained in greater detail in the following section, “Access Issues Explained.”
Any state that failed the forms test automatically failed the screen reader test.
The Center for Accessible Technology also evaluated the sites for usability issues.
These factors are less commonly considered as access issues, but they can make
a big difference for people with cognitive or learning disabilities, seniors, people
with limited literacy, and people with limited English.
The factors evaluated included the following:
•
Readability.
13
How complex the words and sentence structures are can
affect readers’ ability to understand the text. Readability is measured on a
scale of 1 to 100, with 100 being the simplest to read.
14
•
Additional languages. Providing information in languages other than English
increases the likelihood of comprehension for non-native English speakers
and is required by Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act in many jurisdictions.
15
18
•
Alternate methods of voter registration. Providing information on how to
register to vote by mail or in person is useful if a user is unable to register
online.
•
Means of contacting support. Providing a way for the user to contact
someone by phone or email can be helpful in case of problems registering
online.
•
Accessibility statement. Some websites have a statement explaining the
efforts the state government has made to ensure website accessibility, with
contact information for assistance should someone encounter a barrier.
The table below summarizes the results of the usability issues tested. Boxes
coded in light blue scored well, while those in dark blue scored very well. Boxes
in red scored poorly. White indicates a borderline score.
TABLE 2
California
Utah
Minnesota
Kansas
Ohio
Missouri
Site readability score 52.1 37.4 46.1 45.1 49.3 52.7
Languages supported 10 2 1 1 1 1
Email contact listed No Yes No No Yes Yes
Alternate registration Yes No No Yes No No
Phone number listed Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
Accessibility statement Yes No No No Yes Yes
Good
Poor
Very good
Again, California modeled the best practices, with a high readability score,
multiple languages, and options for users who may have encountered problems
on the website.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 19
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
Ae Iues Explained
This section provides more detail on the most common access barriers for online
voter registration. It is intended to be helpful to the lay person as well as to
programmers and website designers. We have made every attempt to explain the
issues in plain English. If terminology is still confusing, however, please consult
the Web Accessibility Glossary (Appendix A).
The issues are discussed both in order of their importance and frequency, as
reflected in the “Report Card” section above:
1. Inaccessible Forms and
Screen Reader Access
2. Failure to Use Accessible
Coding Language (Semantic
Organization)
3. Skip Navigation
4.“Alt Text” or Alternative
Text for Images
5. Keyboard Accessibility
6. Color Contrast
7. Text Size and Scaling
8. Tab Order
Photo: Shutterstock
20
1. Inaccessible Forms and Screen Reader Access
The most important portion of an online voter registration site is the form a
citizen fills out to register. If a citizen is unable to fill out the form, he or she will
be unable to register to vote online.
Unfortunately, forms have a number of
common accessibility barriers affecting a
Forms are the most
wide range of people with disabilities. Forms
important portion
can be particularly inaccessible for people
using screen readers.
of an online voter
Forms have to tell screen readers not only
what information is required (e.g., name,
registration site.
address, date of birth), but also where that
information should go and what to do if there is a mistake.
For example, Utah’s form was inconsistently coded. As a result, a screen reader
is unable to read where a citizen’s name should go, even though where the
address should go was coded properly. As you can see from the screen shot in
Figure 1 below, it is not often clear from the look of the screen alone whether the
form is accessible to screen readers.
FIGURE 1
In Utah’s form, the “Name” text cannot be read by a screen reader.
The “Name” label is not
being read by screen
readers.
The “Home Address”
label is being read
correctly.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 21
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
There were also barriers if a citizen made a mistake filling out the form. The
messages that alert the user to the mistake, where it is, and what needs to be
fixed were not always accessible to assistive technology, or they were difficult to
find and understand.
Difficulty of Correcting
In most cases, creating a form that is accessible to screen readers is well within the
skill level of the people who designed the existing sites. However, creating a form
that has accessible alerts when errors occur, and an accessible means of form
validation, can be tricky. Fixing these problems may require additional support.
2. Failure to Use Accessible Coding Language
(Semantic Organization)
Semantic coding, or semantic HTML, is a means of coding that reinforces the
significance of any portion or text of a website. It prioritizes the headings and
subheadings in order, making it easier for those who use screen readers—and
everyone else, for that matter—to be able to navigate to the relevant information.
Using semantic HTML makes
webpages work better with
assistive technology. It provides
All users benefit from
proper heading structure, groups
related items into ordered or
semantic markup.
unordered lists, uses data tables
for presenting information in a
tabular format, and uses proper HTML elements for controls. This is especially
important for assistive technology that works with the underlying code of a
website (such as screen reader software), and it also allows the website to be
compatible with assistive technology that may become available in the future.
People who use screen readers have a much easier time finding relevant content
in well-structured pages, but ultimately all users benefit from semantic markup.
22
a. Heading Structures
Heading structure, one of the most important aspects of a webpage, was a
particular issue for the majority of states. Screen reader software reads heading
structures, which allows users to jump from one heading to the next depending
on what they want to read. Headings therefore not only allow users to navigate
more quickly, but also provide blind users with a hierarchical representation of a
page’s content. The Center for Accessible Technology reports that many people
who use screen readers rate heading structure as the most critical component of
a website.
Ohio’s website provides an example of the absence of HTML headings:
FIGURE 2
Ohio’s webpage needs HTML headings.
This should be an H1. Currently
not using a heading at all.
This should be an H2. Currently
not using a heading at all.
This should be an
H2. Currently an H1.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 23
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
Best Practices
California and Utah both scored well in this category. Figure 3 provides a screen
shot of California’s heading structure with the coding revealed.
FIGURE 3
A screenshot from California showing proper use of heading structure.
Difficulty of Correcting
It is very easy to correct poor or absent heading structures.
b. Page Titles
Unique, descriptive page titles are essential for screen reader users. It is the first
item the software reads aloud on a webpage. The page title orients users within
the site, lets them determine if a link they clicked on took them to the desired
location, and lets them know if form submissions have resulted in errors. In
addition, page titles are the default titles shown in search engines and are used
when pages are bookmarked, so descriptive titles are essential for helping all
users find the content.
Best Practices
Figure 4 shows a simple, clear page title from Utah: “Utah Voter Registration –
Register to Vote in Utah.”
24
Figure 5 shows a page title from Ohio. While it tells the website user that he
or she can register to vote, it neglects to tell him or her what state he or she is
attempting to register in.
FIGURE 4
This Utah page shows how to properly title a webpage.
FIGURE 5
Ohio’s page title is incomplete. Without the state name included in the title,
someone using a screen reader could be trying to register to vote in the wrong
state.
Difficulty of Correcting
It is very easy to correct poor or absent page titles.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 25
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
3. Skip Navigation
Skip navigation is an important tool for people who are unable to use a mouse and
for people who use screen readers. Most websites have navigation systems with
multiple links down the left side of the page and/or along the top of the page. For
example, in Figure 6 below, the Kansas Secretary of State has an image at the top
of the page and many links down the left side: Home, About Us, Business Filing
Center, etc. Information on Registration and Voting is on the center of the page.
For sighted individuals who use a mouse, it is quick and easy to skip the links
on the left, turn directly to the page content, and begin reading the desired
information. But for people who navigate by keyboard or with a screen reader,
they must go through the slow, tedious process of tabbing through each link on
the page before getting to the main content.
Skip navigation allows them to skip all these links, just as a sighted reader can,
and begin reading the page’s main content immediately.
FIGURE 6
The home page for the Kansas Secretary of State’s voter registration site.
With a good navigation system, a user with a disability can efficiently get to and
use the desired content.
26
Best Practices
Often, these skip navigation features are hidden from view until the user presses
the tab key. Another method, in this case used by California, is to keep the skip
navigation feature visible for all users.
FIGURE 7
A close-up of good use of a skip navigation link on California’s site.
FIGURE 8
An “activated” skip navigation link on California’s site.
California also makes it easier for keyboard users to identify when the focus has
moved to the skip navigation link by having it change color.
Difficulty of Correcting
It is very easy to incorporate skip links, such as those used by California.
However, it is important to place the skip links in the proper location. Ohio has
tried to use skip navigation, but has placed the link incorrectly—users must scroll
through all the navigation keys before getting to it, and then it does not bring the
user to the main content of the page. This not only undermines the purpose of the
feature, but also inadvertently makes the site less accessible.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 27
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
4. Alt (Alternative) Text for Images
When websites include images, screen readers are unable to communicate the
content or significance of the image to the user. Alternative text (or “alt text”)
attributes are part of HTML web coding and provide a text description of the
image that the screen reader can read to the user with a visual disability. The text
description is usually visible while “hovering” over the image. “Alt text” allows a
user with a visual disability to understand the meaning of the image.
Best Practices
There are a number of websites with guidelines to labeling images with alt text.
16
The Voter Registration website for Missouri is an example of the most common
issues to consider:
FIGURE 9
Missouri’s Voter Registration page.
•
When the image is a photo or drawing. The alt text should describe the
drawing in simple, clear terms, e.g., “A photograph of many hands raised in
the air.”
28
•
When the image is of text. The
alt text should simply repeat the
A missing “alt”
text, e.g., the image at the top
of the Missouri webpage is of
attribute will cause
the words “Jason Kander” and
“Missouri Secretary of State.”
unpredictable screen
The alt text should simply
state, “Jason Kander, Missouri
reader behavior.
Secretary of State.”
•
When the image is purely decorative or contains no content. The alt text
should be entered as null (alt= “”),
17
e.g., the gray figures in the heading
of the page, with links to Business Services, Elections & Voting, etc.
These images are useful to sighted users, but do not add any additional
information to a screen reader and do not need to slow down the reader
with a description.
Mistakes to Avoid
Figure 10, which displays the normally hidden alt text, illustrates a common
problem that occurs when a web designer does not understand the purpose of
an accessibility enhancement. The link to “Accessibility Info” is an image and
has been given an alt attribute. Unfortunately, this—as well as the majority of
other images in that section of the page—has been labeled “Missouri Secretary
of State.” A person using a screen reader on that portion of the website would
not be able to identify the “Accessibility Info” link. Instead, the user would hear
“Missouri Secretary of State, Missouri Secretary of State, Missouri Secretary of
State, Missouri Secretary of State…”
FIGURE 10
Incorrect use of the alt attribute on the Missouri site.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 29
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
FIGURE 11
Correct use of an alt attribute on the Minnesota site.
In the image above, the alt attribute correctly describes the image and helps the
user make sure that they are at the correct site.
Difficulty of Correcting
As a technical matter, adding alt attributes or word labels to images is very
simple. To do this well involves a combination of common sense and an
understanding of how screen readers function on a website. The programmer
must work to convey the right amount of information and consider the relation of
the image to nearby content.
30
5. Keyboard Accessibility
For a webpage to be accessible,
all controls and content must be
Keyboard access…
accessible via the keyboard using
standard keystrokes.
aects a large number
Keyboard access is a very important
of individuals with
aspect of web accessibility, as it
affects a large number of individuals
disabilities.
with disabilities. Users who are blind
do not use a mouse, and people with other disabilities, such as quadriplegia,
carpal tunnel, or Parkinson’s disease, might not be able to control a mouse or
use a touchpad.
Best Practices
At the most basic level, all controls, menus, links, forms, and buttons need to
be accessible via a keyboard. Users should be able to activate all controls via
the tab and enter keys (to move through the page and activate page elements,
respectively).
Webpage authors need to be careful not to build sites that use unconventional
keystrokes or keystrokes that might interfere with assistive technology
commands. Where application-specific keyboard shortcuts are necessary, it is
important to ensure that they can be turned off by the user.
Difficulty of Correcting
Ensuring keyboard accessibility is well within the capabilities of the people who
designed and coded the existing voter registration sites. Any problems that
exist are typically the result of a single element (out of many) on a page not
being keyboard accessible. Thorough testing is important to make sure that all
elements on a page are accessible.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 31
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
6. Color Contrast
Adequate color contrast is particularly important for people with vision
impairments, seniors, and those with reading disabilities. In addition, all users
benefit from higher contrast. In fact, the higher the contrast, the higher the
percentage of users that will be able to read text on the site.
Both Utah and Kansas’ websites provide examples of insufficient contrast. Utah’s
light blue print on a light gray background provides insufficient contrast for many
readers:
FIGURE 12
Utah’s website shows poor color contrast.
Similarly, Kansas’ site provides too little contrast between the small, white
lettering and the light blue background. Few readers would be able to read
“Department of Revenue in conjunction with Secretary of State’s Office.”
FIGURE 13
Kansas’ website has both print that is too small and poor color contrast.
32
Best Practices
Level AA of the Web Content Accessibility
Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 generally provides
No default text
a level of accessibility that the Center for
Accessibility supports. For color contrast,
should be smaller
however, the WCAG AAA standard is
than a 12-point font.
preferable.
Color contrast should be checked as early
as possible in the design process. There are a number of free contrast checkers
that evaluate two colors against the accepted web accessibility guidelines; CforAT
recommends using the WebAIM Color Contrast Checker.
FIGURE 14
This is a strong example from Ohio’s website that shows good contrast between
the text and the background colors.
Difficulty of Correcting
In theory, choosing colors that have adequate contrast is quite simple. As
mentioned above, there are a number of free programs that check contrast
against guidelines and provide a clear pass or fail rating. We recommend
involving all relevant stakeholders in the process when choosing appropriate
colors.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 33
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
7. Text Size and Scaling
Individuals with a range of visual impairments need to be able to increase text
size without having text overlap or disappear. CforAT recommends that no default
text be smaller than the equivalent of 12-point font, and that all text on a website
scale to at least 200 percent of the default without disappearing or overlapping
other text.
For example, Ohio’s website has a default text size for portions of the webpage
that is too small for most seniors and is inaccessible to people with low vision.
FIGURE 15
Ohio’s website with text that is too small.
Best Practices
To meet WCAG 2.0 guidelines for text resizing, it is sufficient to rely on
built-in browser zoom tools. This is significantly easier to implement than
accommodating a 200-percent increase in text size, since browser zoom scales
a page proportionally, while increasing only the text size causes the layout to
change. However, CforAT recommends that organizations accommodate text size
increases separate from browser zoom because we have found that a significant
portion of low vision users:
•
use other browser settings, such as Safari’s “Never use font sizes smaller
than XXpt,” which overrides website font settings without zooming the page.
•
prefer to zoom the text only, because browser zooming results in a lot of
horizontal scrolling, which makes reading difficult.
34
8. Tab Order
Tab order is closely linked
with keyboard accessibility. In
When a user presses the
essence, when a user presses
the tab key, the cursor should
tab key, the cursor should
move in a logical manner. A
major challenge for keyboard-
move in a logical manner.
only users is determining where
they are on the page at any given
moment. One way to make the experience more accessible for keyboard users is
to ensure that the tab order follows the visual order. For English-language sites,
this means the tab order should go from left to right and top to bottom.
Best Practices
Appropriate tab order can be accomplished by setting the “tabindex” on every
focusable element, but CforAT does not recommend this practice. Setting the
“tabindex” almost always leads to code maintenance problems and frequently
ends up making the user experience worse.
The best way to implement good tab order is to ensure that the source order
of the code matches the visual order of the page. New content added to the
page will be in the correct tab order by default, and screen reader and sighted
keyboard users will have a predictable experience navigating within pages.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 35
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
State-by-State Review
For individual Secretaries of State, their staff, and programmers
Reminder
This was a high-level review of the
voter registration websites. CforAT did
not review every page and every detail
on any site. The goal was not to capture
each instance of a barrier, but to find
the most common ones. Thus, the
findings in this section are not a full-
scale audit of any site. We recommend
that states work with professional
access experts in designing their
websites and have professional audits
of their existing websites to correct
errors. While correcting the errors
identified in this report would go a long
way to increasing a site’s accessibility,
we do not recommend that any state
rely solely on this report as a complete
review of its website’s accessibility.
Photo: Shutterstock
36
Other states with online registration websites (as of June 24, 2014)
States with online registration websites reviewed in this report
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 37
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
California
http://registertovote.ca.gov/
TABLE 3
California scorecard.
Accessibility Issue Pass/Fail Notes
Forms Pass Good use of fieldsets, legends, and labels.
Screen reader access Pass
Semantic organization Pass
Skip navigation Pass
Alt text Pass
Keyboard access Pass
Color contrast Pass
Text size and scaling Pass
Tab order Pass
Issues
None. The website had a high level of accessibility and usability.
FIGURE 16
A perfect form from California.
Note: Some elements were removed due to space constraints.
38
Utah
https://secure.utah.gov/voterreg/index.html;jsessionid=0603968a8d520b807cdb-
f55967a2
TABLE 4
Utah scorecard.
Accessibility Issue Pass/Fail Notes
Forms Fail Screen reader is not able to associate
some instructional text with
corresponding input fields.
Screen reader access Fail Unable to interpret forms.
Semantic organization Pass
Skip navigation Pass
Alt text Fail QR code image on step 1 is missing alt
text.
Keyboard access Pass
Color contrast Fail Blue hyperlinks on blue background.
Text size and scaling Pass
Tab order Pass
Issues
When using a screen reader, some input fields are not correctly associated with
the corresponding instructional text. For example, under “Personal Information,”
the “Name” text is not read by the screen reader. This may cause confusion
for some users. There are other cases where the instructional text is correctly
associated with the corresponding input field (see Figure 17).
Recommendation
Use form fieldset and legend elements to improve accessibility. These are
important features used by screen readers to associate instructional text with
corresponding input fields (see Figure 21 in Minnesota analysis for a similar
example).
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 39
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
Issues
The CAPTCHA form is missing a label for the input field.
FIGURE 17
The “Name” text is not read by the screen reader.
The name label is not
being read by screen
readers.
The “Home Address”
label is being read
correctly.
Hyperlinks on the right side of some pages do not have an acceptable contrast
ratio. WCAG 2.0 AA requires a minimum contrast ratio of 3:1. This example is
2.3:1. This may be an issue for some visually impaired users (see Figure 18
below).
FIGURE 18
The contrast ratio is too low.
40
FIGURE 19
Form label example.
There are many more examples of incorrect use of form labels in the HTML code.
The majority of these issues are unmatched “label for” and “id” values.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 41
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
Minnesota
http://www.sos.state.mn.us/index.aspx?page=204
TABLE 5
Minnesota scorecard.
Accessibility Issue Pass/Fail Notes
Forms Fail
Screen reader is not able to associate
instructional text with corresponding input
fields.
Screen reader access Fail Unable to interpret forms.
Semantic organization Fail Incorrect use of HTML headings.
Skip navigation Fail While there is a skip nav feature on the
entry page, there is no skip nav on step 1.
Alt text Pass
Keyboard access Pass
Color contrast Pass
Text size and scaling Pass
Tab order Pass
Issues
Incorrect use of HTML headings. The <h1> element should come before the <h3>
(see Figure 20).
Recommendation
Use form fieldset and legend elements to improve accessibility. These are
important features used by screen readers to associate instructional text with
corresponding input fields (see Figure 21). Step 1 uses labels to associate
instructional text with corresponding input fields. Step 2 does not use labels at all.
42
FIGURE 20
Incorrect use of HTML headings.
FIGURE 21
Example of using “fieldset” and “legend” HTML elements.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 43
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
Kansas
https://www.kdor.org/voterregistration/
TABLE 6
Kansas scorecard.
Accessibility Issue Pass/Fail Notes
Forms Fail Screen reader is not able to
associate instructional text with
corresponding input fields.
Screen reader access Fail Unable to interpret forms.
Semantic organization Fail Not using HTML headings.
Skip navigation Fail No skip nav links.
Alt text Fail No alt text in header graphic.
Keyboard access Pass
Color contrast Fail Header graphic has poor contrast.
Text size and scaling Pass
Tab order Pass
Issues
•
On the entry page (https://www.kdor.org/voterregistration/), form labels
are being used even though there is no form on this page. This may cause
confusion for screen reader users.
•
Labels are being used incorrectly on all form pages (see Figure 22).
Recommendation
Use form fieldset and legend elements to improve accessibility. These are
important features used by screen readers to associate instructional text with
corresponding input fields. One suggested approach is below (see Figure 22).
44
FIGURE 22
Incorrect form and suggested corrections.
The header image has no alt text and poor contrast (see Figure 23 below).
FIGURE 23
Page header image is missing alt text and has poor contrast.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 45
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
Ohio
www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/upload/autoform/vrform_autoform.aspx?page=4763
TABLE 7
Ohio scorecard.
Accessibility Issue Pass/Fail Notes
Forms Fail No use of labels, fieldsets, or legends.
Screen readers not notified of required fields.
Completely inaccessible.
Screen reader access Fail Unable to complete form.
Semantic organization Fail Incorrect use of HTML headings.
Skip navigation Fail In use, but in the incorrect location.
Alt text Fail Improper use of alt text.
Keyboard access Fail When tabbing through page, there is a
keyboard trap at the beginning of the form.
Color contrast Pass
Text size and scaling Fail Default text size too small.
Tab order Pass
Issues
•
The skip navigation occurs after the primary navigation of the page. Skip
navigation should be before all navigation. Furthermore, when clicking the skip
navigation link, the focus should be the beginning of the main content. In this
case, the focus is placed in front of the “Contact Us” link in the left column.
•
Improper use of HTML “alt” attribute. Issues found include use of redundant
text for a grouping of images (see Figure 24) and use of alt text for “spacer”
images used for layout (should use alt “” for layout images).
•
HTML headings should be used in the correct order (see Figure 25).
•
The default text size for some areas of the page is too small. The increase/
decrease font size feature on the top right of the page does not work for any
of the navigation (see Figure 26).
•
Page design is extremely cluttered.
46
FIGURE 24
Incorrect use of “alt” attribute.
FIGURE 25
An example of incorrect HTML headings.
This should be an H1. Currently
not using a heading at all.
This should be an H2. Currently
not using a heading at all.
This should be an
H3. Currently an H1.
FIGURE 26
The default text is too small.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 47
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
Missouri
http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/goVoteMissouri/register.aspx
TABLE 8
Missouri scorecard.
Accessibility Issue Pass/Fail Notes
Forms Fail Incorrect use of labels.
Screen reader access Fail Forms are completely inaccessible to some
screen readers.
Semantic
organization
Fail Should use HTML headings.
Skip navigation Fail No skip navigation.
Alt text Pass
Keyboard access Fail Bypasses forms.
Color contrast Pass
Text size and scaling Fail Uses fixed-font “px” instead of relative-font
“em” or “percentage.”
Tab order Fail Bypasses forms.
Issues
•
There should be at least one HTML “h1” denoting the home page’s main
purpose.
•
Every page should have at least one HTML “h1” tag denoting the page’s
main purpose. The pages on this website have none. In addition, headings
are used by screen readers to navigate to different elements of the page.
Identifying areas of content with HTML headings (levels 1–6) is an important
accessibility feature.
•
The forms are completely inaccessible to some screen readers. Because
labels are used incorrectly, there is no association between many of the
input fields and the corresponding instructional text. It is crucial that the
“label for” value be identical to the corresponding input “id” value. This is
how screen readers associate a label with the corresponding input (see
Figures 27 and 28).
48
Recommendation
Use form fieldset and legend elements to improve accessibility. These are
important features used by screen readers to associate instructional text with
corresponding input fields (see Figure 27 below).
FIGURE 27
Form label example from Missouri.
FIGURE 28
Additional form label example from Missouri.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 49
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
There are many more examples of incorrect use of form labels in the HTML code.
The majority of these issues are unmatched “label for” and “id” values.
The third form screen (the sign and submit page) employs the HTML5 canvas
element. This feature requires a user to use a mouse to “sign” the document. It
appears that this is inaccessible to keyboard and screen reader users. The page
needs to include an alternative method of submitting the form. Furthermore,
this feature may be difficult for users with motor coordination impairments (see
Figure 29 below).
FIGURE 29
An example of an inaccessible canvas feature.
50
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 51
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
Aendix A: Web
Aeibility Gloary
Accessibility
The measure of a webpage’s usability by persons with one or more disabilities.
Accessibility Statement
An accessibility statement provides information about the level of web accessibility
for a website and the methods used to achieve accessibility. It also enables the
website owner to recognize any areas of the website where accessibility needs to
improve and presents a plan for resolving any access barriers; it usually provides a
contact email and/or phone number for people experiencing access issues.
Accessible Form
PDF- or HTML-based forms that allow users of adaptive technologies to access
the information, field elements, and functionality required for completion and
submission of a form, including all directions and cues.
Alternative Text
Textual information that describes an image on a webpage.
Assistive Technology
Any item, piece of equipment, or system—whether acquired commercially,
modified, or customized—that is commonly used to increase, maintain, or improve
functional capabilities of individuals with disabilities.
Focus
Where the user’s focus is on a webpage. Generally represented by a dashed box
that appears around items on the page and associated with tabbing. Also referred
to as keyboard focus.
52
Form Field
A form field is a particular box within a fillable form that requests specific
information. Examples include name, address, phone number, and signature
fields, multiline text boxes, radio buttons, and check boxes.
Heading Tag
In PDF and HTML, heading tags are used as structural navigation aids to help
identify the order of content. Within a PDF, adaptive technologies are able to
search through the document for heading tags (H1, H2, H3, H4, H5, H6) that assist
with skimming a document. Most document designs should attempt to minimize
the number of heading tag levels beyond Heading 3 Tag (H3), as many screen
reader users do not anticipate that many levels.
HTML—HyperText Markup Language
HTML is the standard computer language for webpages. HTML elements form
the building blocks of all websites. It allows images and objects to be embedded
and can be used to create interactive forms. HTML uses computer “tags” that are
bracketed by angles, e.g., <html>. These tags are often paired to show where an
element starts and ends, such as the title of the page, paragraph, etc. It provides
a means to create structured documents by denoting structural semantics for text
such as headings, paragraphs, lists, links, quotes, and other items. It can embed
scripts written in languages such as JavaScript, which affect the behavior of HTML
webpages. A web browser “reads” the HTML files to display and interpret the
webpage content. It is critical to website access, as it indicates the structure of the
page—headings, links, forms, images, etc.
Semantic HTML is the use of HTML markup to reinforce the semantics, or
meaning, of the information in webpages. Marking emphasis, citations, and
loanwords in different ways makes it easier for web agents such as search engines
and other software to ascertain the significance of the text.
Inaccessible
In the context of electronic documents and/or websites, inaccessible pertains to the
difficulties an end user may face when trying to access content. Structuring that can
lead to inaccessibility may include, among other things, lack of keyboard navigation,
requiring the use of a mouse, small text, overlapping text, low-contrast color
combinations, lack of alt text, distracting animations, or the lack of captions.
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 53
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
Keyboard Access
Keyboard access allows users to access each “active” element in the portal with
the keyboard. Keyboard accessibility is especially important for physically impaired
and blind users who cannot use a mouse. All other users will appreciate this
feature, too, especially advanced users who enter mass data or laptop users.
Labels
Most web application pages contain forms that consist of labels and input
elements, such as input fields. The labels are simple text elements that describe
the input elements. With HTML 3.2, the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
introduced a special label element to be used. This new element offers the
advantage that an input field and its label are directly connected. The label’s
attribute establishes the connection. Screen readers are then able to read the
correct label whenever an input element gets the focus.
Screen Reader
Software that reads the content of a computer screen aloud. Screen readers read
only text, so all graphics/images/etc. must have alternative text descriptions using
alt text, captions, transcripts, or other methods. Two popular programs are NVDA
(NonVisual Desktop Access), a free and open source screen reader, and JAWS (Job
Access With Speech), which is produced by Freedom Scientific.
Semantic Markup
Markup (such as HTML) that describes the meaning of document elements, as
opposed to their appearance. Semantic tags include headings (<h1> through <h6>),
lists (<ol>, <ul>, and <dl>), <strong>, and <em>. Non-semantic tags include <div>,
<font>, etc.
Skip Nav
Skip navigation allows users to “skip” to different parts of a webpage to quickly
get to the content they need. The most frequent use of “skip nav” involves jumping
a page’s primary content so that a user does not have to go through repetitive
header, navigation, and other common content design on a site’s pages.
54
Tab Order/Index
An assistive technology strategy. For people who cannot use a mouse, one strategy
for rapidly scanning through links, headers, list items, or other structural items in
a PDF or webpage is to use the tab key to go through the items in sequence. People
using screen readers—whether because they are blind or dyslexic, for example—may
tab through items on a page as well as people using voice recognition can.
WCAG
The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) is developed through the W3C
process in cooperation with individuals and organizations around the world, with a
goal of providing a single shared standard for web content accessibility that meets
the needs of individuals, organizations, and governments internationally. WCAG
2.0 is a stable, technical standard, easily referenced. It has 12 guidelines that
are organized under four principles: perceivable, operable, understandable, and
robust. For each guideline, there are testable success criteria, which are at three
levels: A, AA, and AAA.
Web Accessibility
The principle that all web users should have access to information available on the
Internet.
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
The World Wide Web Consortium is a non-profit organization founded by Tim
Berners-Lee that is responsible for setting the standards for common web creation
and access methods. Major documents include the specifications for the HTML and
XHTML languages and the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG).
SOURCES
Accessible Web Design - Joseph Dolson Web Accessibility and Development Glossary
Accessibil-IT - Accessibility Glossary http://www.accessibilit.com/about-us/
AccessibleTech.org - http://accessibletech.org/access_articles/webinfo/skipNav.php
KDE Glossary of Accessibility Related Expressions - https://accessibility.kde.org/glossary/
Keynote NetMechanic - Accessibility Dictionary
SAP - Accessibility Glossary
uiAccess - Resources on uiAccess
W3C - WAI Printable Glossary
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 55
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
Aendix B: States
with Online Voter
Registration
TABLE 9
Full Online Registration (as of June 24, 2014)
Arizona: EZ Voter Registration
servicearizona.com/webapp/evoter/selectLanguage
California: California Online Voter Registration
registertovote.ca.gov/
Colorado: Go Vote Colorado
www.sos.state.co.us/voter-classic/secuRegVoterIntro.do
Connecticut: Connecticut Online Voter Registration
voterregistration.ct.gov/OLVR/welcome.do
Delaware: I Vote Delaware
ivote.de.gov/
Georgia: Georgia Online Voter Registration
registertovote.sos.ga.gov/GAOLVR/#no-back-button
Indiana: Indiana Online Voter Registration
indianavoters.in.gov/PublicSite/OVR/Introduction.aspx
Kansas: Kansas Online Voter Registration
www.kdor.org/voterregistration/Default.aspx
Louisiana: Geaux Vote
www.sos.la.gov/ElectionsAndVoting/Pages/OnlineVoterRegistration.aspx
56
Full Online Registration (as of June 24, 2014)
Maryland: Maryland Online Voter Registration
voterservices.elections.state.md.us/OnlineVoterRegistration/VoterType
Minnesota: Register to Vote
www.sos.state.mn.us/index.aspx?page=204
Missouri (only with tablet): Vote Missouri
www.sos.mo.gov/elections/goVoteMissouri/register.aspx
Nevada: Nevada Online Voter Registration
nvsos.gov/sosvoterservices/Registration/step1.aspx
New York: New York State Voter Registration Form
www.elections.ny.gov/NYSBOE/download/voting/voteform_enterable.pdf
Oregon: OreStar
secure.sos.state.or.us/orestar/vr/register.do?lang=eng&source=SOS
South Carolina: S.C. Online Voter Registration
info.scvotes.sc.gov/eng/ovr/start.aspx
Utah: Utah Online Voter Registration
secure.utah.gov/voterreg/index.html
Virginia: Virginia Voter Registration
www.vote.virginia.gov/
Washington: MyVote
www.sos.wa.gov/elections/myvote/
Limited Online Registration
Michigan
New Mexico
Ohio
THE CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY   ACLU 57
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
Aendix C:
Recoended
Evaluation Criteria
Section 508 Compliance
“Section 508” refers to Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act. In reference to web
accessibility, it usually refers to the standards outlined in § 1194.22: Web-based
intranet and internet information and applications. These 16 standards were
developed in 1998 and were specific to the web technology at the time. While
some are still applicable, many are outdated. It is possible to have a website that
is “Section 508 compliant” and still has many accessibility barriers.
In addition, Section 508 is currently undergoing a “refresh” that will update it to
be more relevant for today’s technology. The refresh will bring the web standards
much more in line with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0.
For these reasons, CforAT recommends that all clients focus their efforts
primarily on meeting the WCAG 2.0 guidelines and ensuring their content works
for people using today’s assistive technology.
WCAG 2.0 Conformance
The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines are designed to be much less
technology-specific to account for unforeseen advances in technology. As a result,
they are also more vague than the Section 508 standards. To assist website
owners, designers, and developers with meeting the guidelines, there are a
series of techniques described for meeting each guideline. These techniques are
updated to reflect current technology.
58
WCAG 2.0 provides for three levels of conformance: A, AA, and AAA. Level A
represents the most basic level of accessibility, while AAA is the maximum
level of accessibility.
While CforAT advocates for increasing accessibility as much as possible, we
recommend clients achieve AA conformance for most WCAG 2.0 guidelines,
and AAA where possible. Level A conformance simply does not provide for
accessible experiences, and AAA conformance can, in some cases, be cost
prohibitive (though the costs would seldom be a hardship for government
entities).
User Testing
Guidelines and standards are important to help web authors understand how
exactly to build accessible websites. Guidelines are also immensely important
in helping browser vendors, assistive technology vendors, and web developers
converge on techniques that will work for users.
However, it is our strong belief that there is no substitute for testing with
users. By having people with disabilities test every site we evaluate, we are
able to:
•
Discover situations where an interface may work from a technical
standpoint, but be inaccessible because of the order information is
provided, or the language used to describe it.
•
Keep up with the strategies users have for using the web, including
common assistive technology settings, navigation strategies, and
techniques for dealing with problem areas.
The CforAT Approach
Because of CforAT’s expertise in understanding how people with disabilities
use websites, they also test against their own best practices to identify ways
that improve the usability of websites for people with disabilities. Their
approach has been refined through years of working both with organizations
trying to improve their own site’s accessibility and through their Test Bank of
users who are trying to access web content every day.
ACCESS DENIED: BARRIERS TO ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION FOR CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES
ENDNOTES
1. The American Voting Experience: Report and Recommendations of the Presidential
Commission on Election Administration (Jan. 2014), available at https://www.supportthevoter.gov/
files/2014/01/Amer-Voting-Exper-final-draft-01-09-14-508.pdf
.
2. Washington Institute of the Study of Ethnicity and Race and Election Administration Research
Center, Online Voter Registration (OLVR) Systems in Arizona and Washington: Evaluating Usage,
Public Confidence and Implementation Processes 91-94 (April 2010), available at
http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/legacy/uploadedfiles/pcs_assets/2010/onlinevoterregpdf.pdf.
3. Pew Center on the States, “Inaccurate, Costly, and Inefficient: Evidence that America’s Voter
Registration System Needs an Upgrade,” (Feb. 2012), available at http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/
research-and-analysis/reports/2012/02/14/inaccurate-costly-and-inefficient-evidence-that-
americas-voter-registration-system-needs-an-upgrade
4. Sarah Burd-Sharps and Patrick Guyer, Social Science Research Council. The Cost of
Modernizing Voter Registration Systems: A Case Study of California and Arizona (Jan. 2014), p. 12. On file
with authors.
5. Matthew W. Brault, “Current Population Reports, Americans With Disabilities: 2010” (United
States Census Bureau, July 2012), available at http://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/p70-131.pdf.
6. 28 CFR §§ 35.130, 35.160 (a)(1) (“A public entity shall take appropriate steps to ensure that
communications with applicants, participants, members of the public, and companions with
disabilities are as effective as communications with others.”)
7. For a current list, see National Conference of State Legislatures, “Online Voter Registration”
(Aug. 7, 2014), available at http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/electronic-or-
online-voter-registration.aspx.
8. One important note: This was a high-level review of the voter registration websites. CforAT did
not review every page and every detail on any site. The goal was not to capture each instance of a
barrier, but to find the most common barriers. Thus, the findings in this report are not a full-scale
audit of any site. We recommend that states work with professional access experts in designing their
websites and have professional audits of their existing websites to correct errors. While correcting
the errors identified in this report would go a long way to increasing a site’s accessibility, states
should not rely on this report as a complete review of their website’s accessibility.
9. Sarah Burd-Sharps and Patrick Guyer, Social Science Research Council. The Cost of
Modernizing Voter Registration Systems: A Case Study of California and Arizona (Jan. 2014). On file with
authors.
10. Matthew W. Brault, “Current Population Reports, Americans With Disabilities: 2010” (United
States Census Bureau, July 2012), available at http://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/p70-131.pdf
11. http://www.ncddr.org/products/researchexchange/v08n03/8_access.html
60
12. For more detail, please see Appendix C.
13. Developed by Greg Kraus at the North Carolina State University.
14. As a comparison, the Harvard Law Review has a readability score in the low 30s, while Dr.
Seuss’ “Green Eggs and Ham” has a readability score of 100. A score of 60 or above is considered to
be a good goal for reaching the widest audience. In this instance, due to the inherent complexity of
the subject matter, we considered a score of 50 or above to be a passing grade.
15. Find the jurisdictions and languages required here: http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/vot/
sec_203/2011_notice.pdf
.
16. “The Rules of Alt,” available at http://www.htmlcodetutorial.com/images/images_famsupp_85
.html
.
17.
An important rule: whenever an image or <img> element is included in a page, it must be given
an “alt” attribute. Even when the alt attribute is null (alt=””), it is important to include the attribute. This
should not be confused with omitting the alt attribute altogether. A null alt attribute will cause screen
reader software to skip the image altogether. A missing alt attribute will cause unpredictable screen
reader behavior. If the alt attribute is missing, often the screen reader software will attempt to read the
image filename. This can be extremely confusing for users.
Photo: Thinkstock
T
here is growing consensus on the many advantages of
online voter registration. For eligible voters, an online
voter registration system is quick, convenient, and accurate.
Access Denied: Barriers to Online Voter Registration for Citizens
With Disabilities focuses on one urgent issue: the accessibility
of online voter registration websites for voters with
disabilities. One in five people eligible to vote has a disability.
Making sure these citizens can register to vote online removes
the need for a time-consuming trip to the Department of
Motor Vehicles, and is also required by the Americans with
Disabilities Act.