This document contains:
(The project that has been undertaken has followed some of what I proposed - see comments in situ below:)
Title of Thesis: Mapping the World Wide Web for Accessibility
This title will change but not in substance, only wording...
• Project Description
This programme is for a theoretical information framework for mapping in which the topology of an information space is documented in metadata. The aim of the mapping is to maximise the accessibility of the information involved. The role of mapping with metadata in this process will be investigated with questions such as the following:
The applicant aims to research the development of a metadata framework and implementation specifications so that the role of metadata in the process of making the World Wide Web accessible will be maximised.
I think that I have done this work and it is what I am now explaining in what I am writing....
Mapping usually involves a representation of data based on abstractions of original data. This may be called ‘metadata' and, in this research program, is about the metadata that should be developed to map World Wide Web resources to increase the Web's accessibility. A multimedia map is usually presented in a single or range of forms that suit different sensory modalities. A map is often presented by a computer-driven device such as a video monitor, or as information for a device that uses it, to support discovery, rendering or other services for a user or user (computer) agent. Such a map usually depends on dynamic rendering from a dynamically updated database. A mapping framework will be developed that will be aimed at making the Web maximally accessible and available using all modalities, or any selective sets of them.
I think we could say that what we have developed for IMS and DC is this and it is now a recommended specification from both bodies and on track to be recommended by ISO. It is also being adopted by the Australian Standards organisation. This work could not have been done by a single person so I worked with and through a group - collaboratively. I am not sure how to describe such work for phd purposes????
Accessibility in this context means the availability of the content of the Web, resources or services, to any user given their specific needs in terms of devices and human abilities/disabilities. Exactly what might cause users to have accessibility problems is not important as accessibility solutions depend upon multi-modality and device independence of resources. It is the case, however, that the motivation for this work in the applicant's case is to ensure that those with special needs because of disabilities they may have, can get maximal accessibility to the Web's resources. Resources rather than content are considered because 'content' is not always static or permanent so ephemeral and transitory forms may need to be considered.
Metadata occurs at different levels of granularity. Discovery metadata tends to replicate that of library catalogues. A set of criteria, a cataloguing framework or mapping framework, is adopted for resource description and values for the individual resources are recorded to form catalogue records. In the past, such catalogue (sets) were almost always for collections of materials of a similar kind: paintings, books, museum collections, musical scores. In the case of the World Wide Web, the resources are usually digital but of a variety of modalities: text, images, sounds, moving images, applications, etc.
Mapping digital objects at whatever level of granularity somehow implies a need for also mapping them at a finer and at a coarser level of granularity. To take a Web page as a single entity is to disregard that it usually consists of a variety of objects: text, images, headings, links, brought together for discovery and presentation purposes under a single universal resource identifier , and sometimes displayed as a single object. But most Web pages are part of a bigger collection, often a Web site.
This granularity problem has sort of dissolved as a result of the way we have described the resources and their components...
The proposed research aims for a framework for describing the specifications for mapping the accessibility of Web resources that can be used locally and globally with similar efficacy, is recommended by critical communities world-wide so it is likely to have fast adoption, and that, effectively, can be considered a Web ‘standard'.
the result is a framework of flexibility dependent upon metadata mapping - which comes on top of the content creation exercise ...
2. Rationale for the Research
When the student commenced this research, there was no international mapping standard for describing the accessibility of Web resources and services or for making Web resources more accessible. The need is to identify the requirements for such descriptions, to identify work that needs to be done to achieve a unified way of making the descriptions, and to get international collaboration to work on the new standard, and to actually do the work and develop the standard.
The applicant has discovered that there are a number of related standards and recommendations that should be considered (see http://dublincore.org/groups/access/standards.html ), a number of groups working on technologies that are relevant (see http://www.dc-anz.org/access-roadmap/roadmap-db.html ), and a number of organisations with interest in the outcomes. All of these have to be bought together in order to achieve an appropriate new standard (see http://dublincore.org/groups/access/poster.html ).
the collaboration happened ....amazingly, in fact!
The applicant's role in the development process is of research in that it involves investigation and understanding of existing literature, analysis of an important problem, and a reasoned argument for a proposed theoretical solution. Such research has been described by John Seely-Brown, head of Xerox Parc, one of the most influential research groups, as pioneering research (1998 ). Pioneering research is creative and points to the future, when the results will be evaluated. In the present case, the research involves the investigation of a vast range of materials, including specifications, requirements and regulations, which will form the base for the work to both the specifications developed and the theoretical framework for them. In pioneering research in the field of Web technologies, peer evaluation is fast and usually measured by the adoption of the outcomes (usually specifications). The sustainability of the outcomes is often dependent upon the appropriateness of the theoretical framework on which they are based. In the current case, there are numerous information models being brought together for a single solution, so the overall model will need to accommodate them all. While recognising the immediate and pressing problems of accessibility and lack of it, and participating in a cross-organisational team working on these issues, the applicant proposes to determine a theoretical framework that will support whatever specifications and potential standards emerge from the work.
I don't know how to describe this ....? It's what i said I'd do and it is what I have done so surely it must count somehow????
The applicant has identified a number of aspects of resource accessibility that probably should be recorded (mapped), for a variety of purposes:
Such questions need to be carefully formulated as the requirements for accessibility mapping. The form and content of the descriptions need to be determined and the form of representation needs to be determined, bearing in mind that both humans and computers will need to use these descriptions. Finally, it is important to ensure that whatever is developed as the solution for accessibility is compatible with the range of metadata solutions already in use so it will be adopted quickly and widely.
These questions have been subsumed into the AccLIP and AccMD profiles...
3. Research Methodology
The program will involve participation in a range of international fora. This will be enabled by telecommunications such as email, and telephone conferences and augmented by attendance at some face-to-face meetings. Other participants will include members of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C: http://w3.org/) , the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI: http://dublincore.org/) , the IMS Global Project (IMS: http://www.imsproject.org/ ) and the International Committee on Information Technology Standards (INCITS V2: http://www.incits.org/tc_home/v2.htm ). These groups have, since the commencement of the applicant's work and in large part due to it, agreed to work together to a common charter and have shared deliverables. The applicant will contribute to and have partial responsibility for these in the form of specifications, encoding examples and best practice guides.
done
The applicant will independently undertake research to determine the framework for the specifications including:
• A literature review: a significant part of the product of this is the http://www.WebContentAccessibility.org/ website.
done
• Laboratory work: including an accessibility analysis of a university web site
done, and a paper or two published, but it don't reveal much of value in this context
• A roadmap of current mapping work (January 2003)
did this but not very useful...not much emerged - it was published on the web
• Development of an application profile for the DCMI Accessibility Working Group
did this (in collab with others as is necessary for these things) and it has been accepted as having much higher status than a mere application profile - it is a recommended term
• Engage in the Pittwater design and development (Pittwater is a prototype typical repository for accessibility related metadata)
did this and learned quite a bit...
• Research the use of XML and RDF, two relevant computer languages,
did this and have published papers etc but there is nothing specific I can point to
• Undertake scenario and use-case development work
did this - use cases published on websites and in papers and in the specs
• Investigate micro mapping - what mapping is required to make a mathematical text accessible to a person dependent on braille,, for instance?
we have done a lot of this and and will publish a lot next year - including a book in braille, and in accessible mathML, and a course in accessible mathML
• Investigate macro mapping – what mapping is necessary to make resources discoverable, and suitably adapted, for any given user?
done
• Investigate people mapping - what is necessary to realise the potential of resource mapping?
done and published papers and now trying to get DCMI to change topology of metadata standard to accommodate this
Research That Reinvents the Corporation, John Seely Brown. Harvard Business Review on Knowledge Management Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1998; pp. 153-180.