Automated vs. Manual Testing for Accessibility
Ensuring both website content and documents are accessible is crucial for providing an inclusive experience for all users, including those with disabilities. Accessibility standards, such as the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) in the United States, require digital content to be accessible to individuals with disabilities.
Here's a breakdown of the two types of evaluations for accessibility:
Automated Testing
- Automated testing involves using software tools that scan web pages or documents for accessibility issues. These tools can quickly identify common accessibility problems, such as missing alternative text for images, improper heading structure, lack of sufficient color contrast, and more.
- While automated testing is efficient for detecting many accessibility issues, it's important to note that these tools may not catch all accessibility issues. Some issues require human judgment and understanding of context to properly evaluate.
Manual Testing
- Manual testing involves a human reviewer inspecting the content directly to identify accessibility barriers that automated tools may miss. This process typically involves using assistive technologies, such as screen readers, to experience the content from the perspective of users with disabilities.
- Manual testing allows for a deeper understanding of the user experience and can uncover nuanced accessibility issues that automated tools might overlook.
- Manual testing also involves verifying that the content meets accessibility standards and guidelines, such as the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG).
- In addition, there are other accessibility barriers automated testing can't identify. For that reason, it is equally important to manually test content and functionality of site components and forms. The Website Content Accessibility Training Resources page contains a Web Content Manual Review Checklist.
Both automated and manual testing play crucial roles in ensuring accessibility. Automated testing provides a quick way to identify common issues and can be integrated into the development process for ongoing checks. Manual testing provides a more comprehensive evaluation, especially for complex interactions and content that requires human judgment.
By combining both automated and manual testing methods, organizations can ensure that their digital content meets accessibility standards and is inclusive to all users.