Espirales. Revista multidisciplinaria de investigación científica, Vol. 6, No. 42
July - September - 2022. e-ISSN 2550-6862. Pp 39-52
DOI https://doi.org/10.31876/er.v6i42.824
Automatic Web accessibility evaluation process. Case
study
Proceso de evaluación automática de accesibilidad Web. Estudio de caso
Sonia Itatí Mariño*
Pedro Luis Alfonzo*
Received: October 11, 2021
Approved: March 09, 2022
* Department of Computer Science. Faculty
of Exact and Natural Sciences and
Surveying. Universidad Nacional del
Nordeste. Corrientes, Argentina,
simarinio@yahoo.com,
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3529-7003
* Department of Computer Science. Faculty
of Exact and Natural Sciences and
Surveying. Universidad Nacional del
Nordeste. Corrientes, Argentina.
plalfonzo@hotmail.com,
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5447-8518
Abstract
Web Accessibility, a topic of universal connotation, emerges as
an aspect that cannot be postponed due to the digitalization
increased by the social, preventive and compulsory isolation
caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Web Accessibility can be
approached from different angles, be they engineering-
technological aspects or social and professional issues. The
article presents a process focused on automatic validation. The
study is performed on the home pages of a sample of 13 sites
built to solve specific problematic situations. The analysis of the
results determined that the limitation to understand is the most
frequent factor, followed by the limitation of the upper limbs,
total limitation to see, severe limitation to see and limitations
derived from age. The findings indicate the need to advance in
these studies, aimed at raising awareness and reducing the
barriers to access to information in order to ensure an inclusive
knowledge society.
Keyword:
web accessibility, process, automatic validation, access
to information
Cite this:
Mariño, S., Alfonzo, P. (2022).
Automatic Web accessibility
evaluation process. Case study
Espirales. Revista Multidisciplinaria
de investigación científica, 6(42),
39-52
Automatic Web accessibility evaluation process. Case study
Espirales. Revista multidisciplinaria de investigación científica, Vol. 6, No. 42
July - September - 2022. e-ISSN 2550-6862. pp 39-52
40
Introduction
The substantive activities of the University concern research, teaching, extension,
transfer and training of human resources and the different interrelationships that derive
from them. There is a diversity of theoretical-methodological strategies to achieve the
goals of the various institutional projects. It is Social Responsibility of the University
actors to contribute to the consolidation of the Information society (Larrán and Andrades
Peña 2015; Hernández Arteaga, Alvarado Pérez and Luna 2015; Toca Torres 2017;
Mariño, Alfonzo and Godoy 2021). Thus, involving future professionals from the
undergraduate level is considered relevant for the software industry.
The article evaluates websites built to improve Web Accessibility (WA) and thus
contribute to positive and relevant user experiences in the context of inclusive societies.
From the perspective of Software Engineering (SI) it is remarkable to determine the
quality of software products in the development process, being the WA a measure
applicable from early stages of development and treated as a non-functional
requirement (Mariño et al. 2012; Hernández Arteaga, Alvarado Pérez and Luna 2015).
The User Experience (UX) ensures the appropriation by the recipients of a development.
Therefore, considering the UX as a quality assurance strategy contributes to the digital
transformation of the 21st century by facing the inclusion in this new and avoiding
restrictions on access to information. In Mariño, Alfonzo and Godoy (2021), AW is
proposed to ensure positive user experiences. The SWEBOK (Software Engineering
Body of Knowledge) guide presents 15 knowledge areas (Bourque and Fairley 2014b).
These are identified as software requirements, software design, software design,
software construction, software testing, software maintenance, software configuration
Resumen
La Accesibilidad Web, tema de connotación universal, emerge
como un aspecto impostergable debido a la digitalización
incrementada por el aislamiento social, preventivo y obligatorio
causada por la pandemia de COVID-19. La Accesibilidad Web
puede abordarse desde distintas aristas, sean aspectos
ingenieriles-tecnológicos o cuestiones sociales y profesionales.
El artículo presenta un proceso centrado en la validación
automática. El estudio se realiza a las páginas iniciales de una
muestra de 13 sitios construidos para resolver situaciones
problemáticas específicas. El análisis de los resultados determinó
que la limitación para comprender es el factor más frecuente,
seguido por la limitación de los miembros superiores, la
limitación total para ver, la limitación grave para ver y las
limitaciones derivadas de la edad. Los hallazgos dan cuenta la
necesidad de avanzar en estos estudios, tendientes a
concientizar y disminuir las barreras de acceso a la información
para asegurar una sociedad del conocimiento inclusiva.
Palabras clave
Accesibilidad web, proceso, validación
automática, acceso a la información
Sonia Itatí Mariño, Pedro Luis Alfonzo
Espirales. Revista multidisciplinaria de investigación científica, Vol. 6, No. 42
July - September - 2022. e-ISSN 2550-6862. pp 39-52
41
management, software engineering management, software engineering process,
software engineering models and methods, software quality, software engineering
professional practice, software engineering economics, computer science
fundamentals, mathematical fundamentals, engineering fundamentals.
The SWEBOK guide is considered a guide to the discipline. Among some of its features
are mentioned (Bourque and Fairley 2014a):
• Characterize the contents of Software Engineering.
• To provide access to the body of knowledge in Software Engineering through the
thematic areas.
• Promote a consistent vision of Software Engineering worldwide.
• Clarify the position of Software Engineering with respect to other disciplines, such
as Computer Science or Mathematics.
• Provide a basis for curriculum development and the creation of certification
materials.
It should be clarified that study initiatives such as the one described above are in line
with those discussed in other contexts (Barrios, Marín and Torrente 2017; Casasola
Balsells et al. 2019; Amatriain et al. 2018; Lafuente, Ballesteros and Filippi 2018;
Lafuente et al. 2020). Universal access to the web is a challenge where most activities
are mediated by Internet services.
Web Accessibility (WA) is an aspect of software quality. In particular, it refers to universal
access to the Web, regardless of the type of hardware, software, network infrastructure,
language, culture, geographical location and capabilities of users. It aims to achieve
equal and equitable access (Luján Mora, 2022; W3C, 2022; Mariño, Alfonzo and Godoy
2020a).
Its relevance is supported by the numerous initiatives of recognized organizations such
as W3C (2022), ISO (2022), the Sidar Foundation (2016) and CIDAT (2022).
In addition, many countries have defined and enacted the corresponding regulations,
including the United States, Portugal, Spain, Brazil, Chile, Peru, among others (Luján
Mora 2021). In Argentina, Law 26.653 (InfoLEG 2010, p. 1), on Accessibility of Public
Information on Web Pages, was enacted in November 2010. The text of the Law in its
Article 1 states:
"The national State, including the three powers that constitute it, its decentralized or
autarchic agencies, non-state public entities, State companies and private companies
holding concessions for public services, companies providing or contracting goods and
services, must respect in the design of their web pages the standards and requirements
on accessibility of information that facilitate access to its contents, to all persons with
disabilities in order to ensure real equality of opportunities and treatment, thus avoiding
any kind of discrimination".
Automatic Web accessibility evaluation process. Case study
Espirales. Revista multidisciplinaria de investigación científica, Vol. 6, No. 42
July - September - 2022. e-ISSN 2550-6862. pp 39-52
42
Decree No. 656/2019 and Provision No. 6/2019, provide new guidelines for compliance
with this Law (Marval O'Farrell Mairal 2019). The study and approach to AW is addressed
in other universities as mentioned in Amatriain et al. (2018), Lafuente et al. (2019), Soto
(2021), Balmaceda Castro et al. (2021), Díaz et al. (2021), Herrera et al. (2021), among
others. In most studies, evaluations and analyses focus on the WCAG 2.0 standard
(WCAG, 2008) defined by the W3C.
The aforementioned standard proposes four principles for evaluating AW, identified as:
Perceptible, Operable, Understandable and Robust. Each principle is grouped into
guidelines and these in turn contain the success criteria to verify. Tools and accessibility
experts check compliance with the success criteria in order to determine the level of
accessibility of a web page or site.
The WCAG (2008) defines the corresponding priority level for each criterion or
verification point included in the four principles. Thus, it is specified for the verification
points that concern: i) Priority 1: those to be met to ensure access to the information on
a Web site; ii) Priority 2: those to be met to avoid making it very difficult for certain
groups of users to access the information; iii) Priority 3: those to be met to prevent
certain users from experiencing certain problems in accessing the information.
With respect to the three levels of conformance associated with the priorities, W3C
(2022) determines that: i) if all Priority 1 checkpoints are satisfied, Conformance Level
"A" is achieved; ii) if all Priority 1 and 2 checkpoints are satisfied, Conformance Level
"AA" is achieved; and iii) if all Priority 1, 2 and 3 checkpoints are satisfied, Conformance
Level "AAA" is achieved.
Materials and methods
A process was designed to evaluate the AW, integrating theoretical and empirical
aspects. Phase 1. Documentary research, recovering theoretical aspects related to
legislation, standards and some AW evaluation experiences. Phase 2. Definition of the
process, based on theoretical aspects, oriented to the measurement of AW using
automatic validators. Validation of the process, defining the case study. It is described
in section 3.2. It consisted of a descriptive study of the accessibility of 13 selected
websites, opting for the use of an automatic validator.
Results
For the team of teacher-researchers, it is essential to address theoretical,
methodological and practical aspects based on experience. This makes it possible to
define and apply criteria oriented to unrestricted access to information available on the
web, and to contribute with positive experiences for users with a view to improving their
quality of life, particularly by focusing on access to contents.
In reference to the theoretical underpinning of this study, some issues of Software
Engineering and its relationship with AW are mentioned, as shown in Figure 2.
Sonia Itatí Mariño, Pedro Luis Alfonzo
Espirales. Revista multidisciplinaria de investigación científica, Vol. 6, No. 42
July - September - 2022. e-ISSN 2550-6862. pp 39-52
43
• Delimitation of knowledge areas of the Swebok guide integrated in the proposal.
Of the SI knowledge areas, the following were chosen: Software Requirements
(SR) and Software Evaluation (SE). RS was selected to ensure that AW is included
as a non-functional requirement. As a non-functional requirement and the ES
focused on the evaluation of the AW as an aspect of software quality, in particular
to verify compliance with the chosen standard. The knowledge area Software
Requirements, deals with the elicitation, analysis, specification and validation of
software requirements, as well as the management of requirements throughout
the software product life cycle. Requirements express the needs and constraints
imposed on a software product that contribute to the solution of some real-world
problem (Bourque and Fairley 2014b). Software Evaluation consists of the
verification that a program provides the expected behaviors on a finite set of test
cases, appropriately selected from the execution domain (Bourque and Fairley
2014b). In this study, they target test cases with respect to compliance with WCAG
2.0 guidelines.
• Identification and analysis of quality standards related to AW: WCAG (2008), UNE
(2012), Mobile Accessibility (2015), WCAG (2018), opting for WCAG 2.0 to
determine AW levels in different software products and thus suggest and/or apply
improvements.
• Determination of AW models, methods and procedures. The literature establishes
various ways of proceeding in the evaluation of AW, it is required to define the
scope of each of these resources, similarities and differences; and the feasibility
of adapting to the context, according to guidelines and criteria described in
Ilunion (2015) and defined in the WCAG (2008).
The following activities are proposed:
• Selection of the Evidence-Based Software Engineering or ISBE method (Mariño
and Alfonzo 2019). It consisted of the following stages: i) Definition; ii)
Experimental design; iii) Conduct and analysis; iv) Interpretation of the results, v)
Preparation of the report.
• Experimentation. In the analysis of the AW, based on a descriptive quantitative
approach.
• Description of the research variables related to the object of study. The
international standard WCAG (2008) was chosen for the evaluation of the AW.
• Selection of data collection tools, i.e., those to automatically evaluate AW. Some
of these include TAW, Hera, Examinator.
• Definition of limitations. The experimental study is restricted to the use of an
automatic validator that checks the accessibility of the HTML code of the chosen
page. Several validators can be applied to obtain other results and thus facilitate
the triangulation of information.
• Execution of automatic AW tests applied to the sample web pages and collection
of empirical data.
• Estimation of metrics. The PIC metric (1) is defined, which determines the
percentage of non-compliance per criterion in the sites analyzed. That is, it
Automatic Web accessibility evaluation process. Case study
Espirales. Revista multidisciplinaria de investigación científica, Vol. 6, No. 42
July - September - 2022. e-ISSN 2550-6862. pp 39-52
44
determines the criteria incorrectly applied and detected by the selected data
collection tool.
PIC =
CSIC = Number of sites that
do not comply with the
analyzed criterion.
(1)
CSA = Number of sites
analyzed
• Analysis of results. The findings are synthesized quantitatively by applying the PIC
metric. In addition, the information collected for each element of the sample can
be used to support the maintenance of that website.
To validate the proposed process, 13 (thirteen) websites developed for various
organizations, public and private in the period 2016-2020 were selected. These artifacts
were built using various web development tools. As discussed in Mariño and Alfonzo
(2019), for privacy reasons the name and email address of the evaluated sites are
omitted. Their construction was characterized by: i) orientation towards the resolution
of a problem posed by a need for information processing and its dissemination through
the web; ii) use of development environments and freely distributed languages in the
generation of the code; iii) execution of verification tests; iv) assurance regarding the
functioning of the product by its recipients.
In order to obtain empirical evidence, the principles, the guidelines they group together
and the criteria included in the WGAG 2.0 guidelines (WCAG, 2008) were verified.
The automatic data collection validator Examinator (2015), available online, was chosen
to capture evidence of how accessible each of the sites that made up the sample is. Its
choice is based on the fact that it is a web-based tool that facilitates access to the
information processed as a result of the analysis. This tool automates the assessment of
the WCAG 2.0 (WCAG, 2008), using as a reference the techniques recommended by
the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (WCAG, 2008). It awards a score between
1 and 10 according to the errors and successes detected, assigning a grade and
provides a detailed report of the tests performed. The tests are based on the techniques
recommended by the WCAG (2008) and the results measure the performance of the
page with respect to those techniques; and the grade reflects the accessibility of the
content (Benavides, 2012) proposes the following scale: Very bad: 1, Bad: 2 or 3, Fair:
4 or 5, Good: 6 or 7, Very good: 8 or 9, Excellent: 10 in order to express value
judgments.
The selected sites were evaluated. An analysis focused on their home pages,
summarized in Table 1, summarizes that in most of the tests applied, errors in the
excellent category - on average 5.23 and bad - representing an average of 3 - were
more frequently found in the 13 sites evaluated. In addition, the least frequently
detected errors correspond to the very bad and regular categories. The automatic
100*
CSA
CSIC
Sonia Itatí Mariño, Pedro Luis Alfonzo
Espirales. Revista multidisciplinaria de investigación científica, Vol. 6, No. 42
July - September - 2022. e-ISSN 2550-6862. pp 39-52
45
evaluation tool detects the values according to different types of disabilities such as:
total limitation to see, severe limitation to see, limitation of the upper limbs, limitation
to understand and limitations derived from age (Benavidez 2012).
In Table 2, the evaluation focuses on determining the various types of disabilities,
focusing the study on the initial pages. It is identified that the limitation to understand
is the most frequent factor, the second place corresponds to the limitation of the upper
limbs, followed by the total limitation to see, the severe limitation to see and finally the
limitations derived from age.
Following the scale proposed in Benavidez (2012), given that on average the limitations
exceed the value 5 and are less than 7, it is possible to infer that the accessibility of the
sites analyzed is good. However, it is necessary to pay attention to the details of the
errors detected in the different tests in order to apply AW criteria from the early stages
of web development.
Table 1.
Scores assigned to the evaluated sites according to limitations.
Sites
NumberTotalTests
Excellent
Very
good
Good
Regular
Mal
Very
Bad
Site 1
5
5
Site 2
5
Site 3
1
Site 4
5
1
Site 5
Site 6
Site 7
1
Site 8
Site 9
5
Site 10
Site 11
1
1
Site 12
1
1
1
Site 13
1
Average
9,92
5,23
-
-
1,40
3,00
2,13
Since the WCAG (2008) proposes four principles: Perceptible, Operable,
Understandable and Robust, which are grouped into guidelines and these in turn
contain the success criteria to verify. Table 3, presents the evaluation of the 13 (thirteen)
websites considering the PIC metric.
Automatic Web accessibility evaluation process. Case study
Espirales. Revista multidisciplinaria de investigación científica, Vol. 6, No. 42
July - September - 2022. e-ISSN 2550-6862. pp 39-52
46
Table 2.
Scores assigned to sites evaluated according to constraints
Sites
Total
limitation
to view
Severely
limited
vision
Limitation
of the
upper
limbs
Limitation in
understanding
Age-
related
limitations
Site 1
5,7
6,1
6,1
6,1
Site 2
4,7
5
4,5
5
Site 3
4,5
5,7
5,8
4,8
5,9
Site 4
6,7
6,1
7,9
6,1
6,4
Site 5
7,1
7,4
5,8
5,5
7,4
Site 6
5,7
6,5
5,8
5,5
6,4
Site 7
7,3
6,9
7,4
6,7
7,3
Site 8
6,7
7,4
7,8
7,4
Site 9
5,1
5,6
4,1
4,1
5,4
Site 10
5,7
6,4
4,8
4,9
6,8
Site 11
6,4
5,8
6,7
5,5
5,8
Site 12
7,5
7,5
7,2
6,1
7,2
Site 13
7,1
7,1
6,1
6,9
7,7
Average
6.17
6.42
5.98
5.72
6.52
Table 3 shows that the Perceptible principle and in particular guideline 1.3.1 Information
and relationships presents the highest PIC, followed by guideline 2.4.4 Purpose of links
(in context only) reaching 85%. Likewise, guideline 4.1.1 Processing of the Robust
principle and guideline 2.4.9 - Purpose of links (only links) of the Operable principle
show a lower PIC, representing 8% of non-compliance with the criteria.
The technological projects analyzed are framed within an agreed general objective, to
achieve accessible websites implemented in different contexts. However, the specific
objectives were delineated and modified in a process of continuous action. The above
coincides with what is explained in Barba Martín (2019 p. 126), who states that "realities
are changeable and, as such, researchers may modify the objectives and focal points of
the research as new knowledge is acquired and/or conditions change".
Table 3.
Percentage of non-compliance of the evaluated sites
Principles
Guidelines/Criteria
Leve
l
CSI
C
PIC
Perceptible
1.1-Alternative texts
1.1.1 - Non-textual content
A
1.3-Adaptable
1.3.1 - Information and relationships
A
92
%
1.4-Distinguishable
1.4.3 - Contrast (Minimum)
A
23
%
Sonia Itatí Mariño, Pedro Luis Alfonzo
Espirales. Revista multidisciplinaria de investigación científica, Vol. 6, No. 42
July - September - 2022. e-ISSN 2550-6862. pp 39-52
47
1.4.4 - Text resizing
A
31
%
Operable
2.4-Navigable
2.4.2 - Title pages
A
2.4.4 - Purpose of links (in context)
A
85
%
2.4.9 - Purpose of links (links only)
AAA
1
8%
2.4.10 - Section headings
AAA
Understandabl
e
3.1-Eligible
3.1.1 - Page language
A
5
38
%
3.3-Assisted Data Entry
3.3.2 - Labels or instructions
A
31
%
Robust
4.1-Compatible
4.1.1 - Processing
A
1
8%
In addition, following De Oliveira Figueiredo (2015) and considering the diversity of
aspects of the social reality, flexibility was assumed in the different intervention projects,
attending to the specific characteristics, in order to meet the expectations of potential
users.
In view of the above, analyzing web accessibility and reporting the findings contributes
significantly to reducing barriers to access to information in the knowledge society.
Thus, an approach to Web Accessibility from the perspective of university social
responsibility is exemplified in Mariño, Alfonzo and Godoy (2020b) and Mariño, Alfonzo
and Godoy (2021).
Conclusions
Numerous efforts revolve around education among which the right to "inclusive,
equitable and quality education, promoting learning opportunities" referred to in the
fourth sustainable development goal of the 2030 Agenda of the United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO, 2021). In particular, Iglesias
and Martín (2020) refer to the Salamanca Statement that defines at the international
level the so-called inclusive education.
It is worth noting the international efforts, the numerous AW legislation and standards
to comply with these initiatives that ensure access to content in an effort to ensure
universal inclusion. In this sense, the article proposes an integration of theory and
practice, planning, action (through the evaluation of AW), analysis of results, aimed at
awareness and transformation for individual and communal well-being, focused on
ensuring access to content.
Automatic Web accessibility evaluation process. Case study
Espirales. Revista multidisciplinaria de investigación científica, Vol. 6, No. 42
July - September - 2022. e-ISSN 2550-6862. pp 39-52
48
In addition, it reflects the social responsibility of educational institutions and in particular
from this work team, from the evaluation of the AW to raise awareness and exemplify
the subject with concrete cases from a participatory action research approach.
Therefore, the knowledge acquired and deepened within the framework of the different
interventions is capitalized by the human resources trained and in training who are
inserted in the Software Industry, thus reflecting the know-how. On the other hand, the
R&D&I team systematizes the experiences in a database to address future interventions.
The transfer of knowledge, mediated to empirical activities and developed in academic
environments, is oriented to achieve the disciplinary training in Web Accessibility as a
social, technological and professional aspect in line with the approach of computer
science as a bio-psycho-social discipline.
..........................................................................................................
References
Amatriain, H., Martins, S., Bianco, S., Ribeiro F., &
Perez, N. (2018). Graphical interpretation
tools for coding system modeling
diagrams interpretable by a visually
impaired. In XX Workshop of Researchers
in Computer Science. Argentina.
Balmaceda, I., Salgado, C., Peralta, M., Sanchez,
A., Fernandez, M. and Vera, C. E. (2021).
Towards an integral model of Accessibility
in e-Learning Systems. XXIII Workshop of
Researchers in Computer Science.
Argentina.
Barba, R. A. (2019). Participatory action research
from the point of view of teachers
participating in a process of ongoing
teacher training on inclusive education.
Doctoral thesis, University of Valladolid.
Retrieved from:
https://uvadoc.uva.es/bitstream/handle/1
0324/37920/Tesis1545-
190913.pdf?sequence=1
Barrios, T., Marín, M., & Torrente, N. (2017). The
Use of Technology for the Inclusion of the
Visually Impaired in the Classroom. XIX
Workshop of Researchers in Computer
Science. Argentina.
Sonia Itatí Mariño, Pedro Luis Alfonzo
Espirales. Revista multidisciplinaria de investigación científica, Vol. 6, No. 42
July - September - 2022. e-ISSN 2550-6862. pp 39-52
49
Benavidez, C. (2012). eXaminator White Paper.
Retrieved from:
http://examinator.ws/info/libro_blanco_ex
aminator.pdf
Bourque, P. and Fairley, R E. (2014a). SWEBOK
Guide to the Software Engineering Body
of Knowledge, Version 3.0. IEEE
Computer Society. Retrieved from:
https://www.computer.org/education/bo
dies-of-knowledge/software-engineering
Bourque, P. and Fairley, R. (2014b). Guide to the
Software Engineering Body of Knowledge.
Version 3.0. IEEE Computer Society.
Casasola, L. A., Guerra González, J. C., Casasola
Balsells, M. A., Pérez Chamorro, V. A.
(2019). Web accessibility of online
appointment scheduling in primary care,
Gaceta Sanitaria. 33(1), pp. 85-88.
Díaz, J., Schiavoni, A., Amadeo, P., Harari, I.,
Osorio, A. and Carrilao Avila, F. (2021).
Experience of making a mooc accessible
considering the platform and multimedia
resources. XXIII Workshop of Researchers
in Computer Science. Argentina.
De Oliveira Figueiredo, G. (2015). Participatory
Action Research: an alternative for social
epistemology in Latin America. Revista de
Investigación, 39(86), pp. 271-290.
CIDAT (2021). Center for Research and
Development of Typhlotechnical
Adaptations. Retrieved from:
http://cidat.once.es/
Examinator (2015). Web Accessibility Evaluator.
Retrieved from: http://examinator.net/
Fundación Sidar (2016). Fundación Sidar -
Universal Access-. Retrieved from:
http://www.sidar.org/
Hernández, R. I., Alvarado Pérez, J. C. and Luna,
J. A. (2015). Social responsibility in the
university-business-State relationship.
Educación y Educadores, 18(1), pp. 95-
110.
Herrera, S. I., Fennema, M. C., Maldonado, M.,
Morales, M.I., Palavecino, R. A.,
Rosenzvaig, F., Macedo, A., Jiménez, A.,
Automatic Web accessibility evaluation process. Case study
Espirales. Revista multidisciplinaria de investigación científica, Vol. 6, No. 42
July - September - 2022. e-ISSN 2550-6862. pp 39-52
50
Divi, P. and Barrera Nicholson, P. (2021).
Mobile, accessible and intelligent systems
for an inclusive society. XIII Workshop of
Researchers in Computer Science.
Argentina.
Iglesias, A. and Martín, Y. (2020). Scientific
production in inclusive education:
advances and challenges. Revista
Colombiana de Educación, 78, pp. 383-
418.
Ilunion (2015). Methodology to evaluate the
accessibility of mobile applications.
Fundación ONCE. Retrieved from:
http://www.amovil.es/sites/default/files/m
etodologia_para_evaluar_la_accesibilidad
_de_aplicaciones_nativas.pdf
InfoLEG (2010). Law 26.653. Accessibility of
Information on Web Pages. Retrieved
from:
http://servicios.infoleg.gob.ar/infolegInter
net/anexos/175000-
179999/175694/norma.htm
ISO (2022). International Organization for
Standardization. Retrieved from:
http://www.iso.org/iso/home.html
Lafuente, G. J., Ballesteros C., & Filippi, J. L.
(2018). Development of a Usable and
Open Distance Training Platform for
People with Visual Impairment. XX
Workshop of Researchers in Computer
Science. Argentina.
Lafuente, G., Ballesteros, C., Filippi, J. and
Lafuente, J. H. (2019). Implementation of
an open and accessible distance training
platform with educational resources aimed
at visually impaired people. In XXI
Workshop of Researchers in Computer
Science. Argentina.
Lafuente, G. J., Ballesteros, C., Filippi, J. L. and
Lafuente, G. H. (2020). Construction of a
distance training tool and open
educational resources under a universal
design approach oriented to visually
impaired people. XXII Workshop of
Sonia Itatí Mariño, Pedro Luis Alfonzo
Espirales. Revista multidisciplinaria de investigación científica, Vol. 6, No. 42
July - September - 2022. e-ISSN 2550-6862. pp 39-52
51
Researchers in Computer Science.
Argentina.
Larrán, J. M. and Andrades Peña, F. J. (2015).
Analysis of university social responsibility
from different theoretical approaches.
Revista Iberoamericana de Educación
Superior, 6(15), pp. 91-107.
Luján, S. (2022). University of Alicante. Web
Accessibility. Retrieved from:
http://accesibilidadweb.dlsi.ua.es
Mariño, S. I., Godoy, M. V., Alfonzo, P., Acevedo,
J., Gómez Solis. L. and Fernández
Vázquez, A. (2012). Accessibility in the
definition of non-functional requirements.
Review of tools. Multiciencias, 12(3), pp.
305 - 312.
Mariño, S. I. and Alfonzo, P. L. (2019). Evidence of
Web Accessibility in site generation.
Proposal of a method. Revista
Iberoamericana de Tecnología en
Educación y Educación en Tecnología, no.
23, pp. 52-60.
Mariño, S. I., Alfonzo, P. L. and Godoy, M. V.
(2020a). Web accessibility measures.
Application in an educational platform.
European Scientific Journal. 16(1), pp. 11-
22.
Mariño, S. I., Alfonzo, P. L. and Godoy, M. V.
(2020b). Social Responsibility focused on
web accessibility. European Scientific
Journal. 16(30), pp. 35-50.
Mariño, S. I., Alfonzo, P. L. and Godoy, M. V.
(2021). Web accessibility from university
contexts. Pasajes Magazine, no. 12, pp. 01
-19.
Marval O'Farrell Mairal (2019). New guidelines for
website accessibility law (October 15,
2019). Retrieved from:
https://www.marval.com/publicacion/nue
vos-lineamientos-para-la-ley-de-
accesibilidad-en-las-paginas-web-13425
Mobile Accessibility (2015). W3C Mobile
Accessibility: How WCAG 2.0 and Other
W3C/WAI Guidelines Apply to Mobile.
Retrieved from:
Automatic Web accessibility evaluation process. Case study
Espirales. Revista multidisciplinaria de investigación científica, Vol. 6, No. 42
July - September - 2022. e-ISSN 2550-6862. pp 39-52
52
https://www.w3.org/TR/mobile-
accessibility-mapping/
Soto, M. A. (2021). The frontiers of accessibility:
barriers in qualitative data processing
programs for visually impaired users. 50
JAIIO. Jornadas Argentinas de
Informática. Argentine Symposium on
Technology and Society. Argentina.
Toca, C. E. (2017). Contributions to social
responsibility. Mexican Journal of Political
and Social Sciences. LXII, no. 230, pp. 393-
408.
UNE. (2012). UNE 139803. Accessibility
requirements for Web content. Madrid,
Spain: AENOR.
UNESCO (2021). Advancing the 2030 agenda for
Sustainable Development. Retrieved from:
https://es.unesco.org/creativity/files/unes
co-avanza-agenda-2030-para-desarrollo-
sostenible
WCAG (2008). Web Content Accessibility
Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0. Retrieved from:
http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/
WCAG (2018). Web Content Accessibility
Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1. Retrieved from:
https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/
W3C (2022). About W3C. Retrieved from:
http://www.w3c.es/Consorcio/
