Lesson 11Post-design steps: how to implement and monitor your accessible design?

Notion 80

Agree on a review schedule

Target skills

Gain insight on the necessity of a regular review schedule

The design and content will evolve over time and a regular check-up can be useful to measure the gap between the original design specifications regarding accessibility and the actual implementation. This can be done on a regular basis, but should be done especially after specific events.

Events to start a review

We saw in the previous lesson that contributions can be a source of issues for content accessibility. As contributions can be added regularly, a regular check-up seems adapted. But we need to consider that some events are particularly prone to generate accessibility problems, and they should trigger a review just after their implementation. These events can be:

New feature implemented, such as a new cookie banner, a new media player or a new menu
Design modifications, such as color used, general layout, new landmarks
Addition or removal of content block, and how it can be accessed

How to do a review

A review done through an accessibility standpoint should focus on guidelines and best practices, using tools to do a quick report of the main problems. An exhaustive use of the elements with keyboard navigation and a screen reader will reveal other problematic elements.
Using the WCAG and inspecting the actual code, we can find solutions for each of these problems. It is important to identify the problem precisely in order to correct it effectively.
Then, we can report each problem in a file or a report system. It should have the following fields for each spotted issue:

Date
Localisation of the problem
Operating system and web browser used to spot the problem
Expected behaviour
Actual behaviour
Priority level, depending if it’s a design or content problem. The latest is usually faster to resolve.
State – Resolved or not for the reviewer to track its tasks.

Once the review is done

The reviewer should double-check that its corrections have not introduced new problems. Further more, the review should be transmitted to the design team in order to avoid further issues in future designs.