WAI R&D Symposia » Mobile Home » Proceedings » This paper.
This paper is a contribution to the Mobile Accessibility Online Symposium. It was not developed by the W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) and does not necessarily represent the consensus view of W3C staff, participants, or members.
Assessment of Keyboard Interface Accessibility in Mobile Browsers
Problem Statement
Smartphone evolution has generally tended away from onboard physical keyboards towards touchscreen-driven devices. While the trend is usually exemplified by the Apple iPhone, the trend is also evident on other platforms, such as Android, Windows Phone and even BlackBerry. From an accessibility perspective, onboard physical keyboard are not a strict requirement, however, without them, the less obvious software supports for keyboard accessibility can be put at risk.
Background
Onboard physical keyboards can benefit several groups of users with disabilities. The first are people with visual disabilities who can benefit from keys that are discernible by touch without activation, so clearly separated keys, key nibs and standard layouts are also important factors. A second group are people with certain dexterity disabilities, who can benefit from keyboards optimized to minimize inadvertent presses, so key spacing and shape are also important factors. A third group are people who can be confused by the dynamic nature of onscreen keyboards and who can benefit from the consistency of a physical keyboard.
As a result, the industry move towards touchscreens carries intrinsic accessibility risk. However, in reality, these have been somewhat attenuated by the following innovations:
1. Touchscreen-optimized screen readers help certain users explore the screen without accidentally activating controls. For example, VoiceOver on the iPhone (3GS and higher) and Explore-by-Touch mode in Android 4.x [1].
2. Enhanced support for external control, especially via Bluetooth. Size constraints in mobile devices have always meant that onboard physical keyboards tend to be small, which can make them difficult to use for people with certain dexterity impairments. Moreover, such onboard keyboards are not usable at all by people who are unable to touch the devices directly, instead relying on ability switches and/or wheelchair controls. The most common type of external control support that is being added to mobile devices is support for external keyboards, which are then free to be larger than onboard keyboards (though some are small and mobile) and can be equipped with keyguards, if required. The various Bluetooth connection possibilities have also begun to enable external control via ability switches and/or wheelchair controls (e.g., via Tecla Access [2]).
However, while technically, the phase-out of onboard physical keyboards does not appear to be presenting major accessibility problems, one likely negative consequence appears to be an erosion of awareness of the existence of keyboard accessibility among developers of both the platforms and third-party applications. We believe that this may occur because the “typical” devices used for routine testing by developers as they will , as onboard keyboards become increasingly rare
Requirements for Keyboard Accessibility on Mobile Devices
In order to enable effective navigation and control by a person using a keyboard or ability switch(es), the following functional requirements must be met (relevant success criteria in the UAAG 2.0 Public Working Draft [3] success criteria will be cross-referenced):
- Focus Indication: A visual indication of the current focus, so that the user know which control will receive an activation command and so the user can judge their progress towards an intended focus target (UAAG 2.0 1.3.1 Highlighted Items, 2.1.2 Keyboard Focus). For example, VoiceOver adds a focus indicator.
- Sequential navigation: The ability to move through all of the controls from start to end (UAAG 2.0: 2.2.1 Sequential Navigation Between Elements). For example, VoiceOver supports full sequential navigation in which the user can swipe through every operable control on the screen. In contrast, some Android devices require the use of the appropriate directional arrows (up, down, left, right) in order to focus some items.
- Focussed controls are operable: Once focus has been navigated to a control, it must be operable with the keyboard (UAAG 2.0: 2.1.1 Keyboard Operation). For example, on Android devices, after using the D-pad controls to move focus to a button, the user can press Enter to activate the button.
- Enough time: Effective keyboard access requires that people be able to enter keystrokes at their own pace (2.1.1 Keyboard Operation). For example, a person using a scanning keyboard will tend to enter keystrokes relatively slowly.
- Non-sequential navigation: is provided to make keyboard navigation more efficient (UAAG 2.0: 2.3.1 Direct Navigation to Important Elements). For example, a mobile device may support “heading navigation” in a web page or a “page down”-type warp functionality.
- Keyboard trap protection: Mobile devices must ensure that keyboard focus is not permanently held by an application or rendered content (2.1.5 No Keyboard Trap). For example, in many cases, a “Home” button is provided to enable the user to return quickly to a Home screen.
Onboard physical keyboards have several accessibility use cases
- people with visual disabilities and those who require an alternative to seeing (e.g. those using a phone in unclear conditions) benefit from keys that are discernible by touch without activation, have clearly separated keys, have key nibs and use a standard layout.
- people with certain dexterity disabilities, people with larger hands, and those who rely greatly on typing (e.g., in email, browser and SMS applications) can benefit from keyboards optimized to minimize inadvertent presses, with clearly spaced keys and a cupped shape
- people who can be confused by the dynamic nature of onscreen keyboards and who can benefit from the consistency of a physical keyboard.
Strategy
In order to ensure keyboard accessibility, mobile software developers will need to be aware of the important accessibility role played by keyboard interfaces and will need to test this functionality as a routine part of QA.
This paper records an attempt to conduct such an evaluation with respect to keyboard accessibility of web content as rendered on a range of mobile web browsers, making use of keyboard accessibility functionality where an onboard physical keyboard is not present. Testing was performed in March 2012.
Mobile Devices
The following mobile devices were tested:
- Samsung Galaxy 551: This Android (v2.2) touchscreen device has an onboard physical QWERTY keyboard.
- Samsung Galaxy Nexus: This Android 4.0.1 touchscreen device was tested with the Tecla Access system (ver. 0.6beta).
- iPhone 4S with iOS 5.1: This iPhone has the newest version of VoiceOver, which builds on native iOS support for system-wide keyboard navigation.
Browsers
The following mobile browsers were tested:
- iPhone 4S Safari
- iPhone 4 Opera Mini
- Android4 Browser
- Android4 Firefox
- Android4 Opera Mobile
- Android4 Chrome Beta
- Android2 Browser
- Android2 Opera Mobile
- Android2 Dolphin Browser HD
As a control, we also tested the same websites on two desktop browsers:
- (Desktop) Safari [4] (Mac OS)
- (Desktop) Firefox 10.0.2 (Windows)
Websites
We identified two popular websites (FaceBook and YouTube) as well as a more accessible control site, the W3C’s site. The mobile and browser based versions of each site were examined. In each case, the tester attempted to reach and operate as much of the functionality as possible using the mobile device control method (listed above).
Table 1: Tested websites
Site | Type | Desktop URI | Mobile URI |
---|---|---|---|
Social Network | http://www.facebook.com (logged-in) | m.facebook.com (logged-in) | |
YouTube | Online Video | www.youtube.com | m.youtube.com |
W3C | Home page | http://www.w3.org | http://www.w3.org (mobile view) |
Outcomes
The results of the testing show that robust keyboard accessibility is technically feasible (e.g. iPhone 4S Safari), many browsers are not paying attention to keyboard accessibility (e.g. iPhone 4S Opera Mini, Android4 Firefox)
Detailed results of the testing are presented in Table 2.
Table 2: Tested Browsers
Mobile Browser | Browser chrome keyboard accessible? |
Sequential Navigation? |
Non-sequential Navigation? |
Focus Indicator? |
Are controls operable once they have focus? |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Desktop Safari (Mac OS) |
Yes |
Yes with exceptions: |
Yes via the VoiceOver rotor. |
Yes with exceptions: |
Yes. |
Desktop Firefox 10.0.2 (Windows) |
Yes |
Yes (using “tab”) with exceptions |
No. But planned [5]. |
Yes with exceptions because user can override with styling |
Yes. |
iPhone 4S Safari |
Yes |
Yes with exceptions: |
Yes |
Yes with exceptions: |
Yes |
iPhone 4S Opera Mini |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Android4 Browser |
No, e.g. Address bar, browser settings, not accessible [7]. |
No |
Yes with exceptions: |
Yes with exceptions: No, e.g.: |
Yes with exceptions: -m.youtube.com: links at bottom of the page; pause, forward, back video controls once a video is playing, and other elements (e.g. like, dislike, share videos) are not operable |
Android4 Firefox |
No [8], e.g. Address bar, browser settings, not accessible |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Android4 Opera Mobile |
No. Opera’s controls (e.g. back, forward, tabs, “O” button to access bookmarks, history, etc.) are not accessible. |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Android4 Chrome Beta |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Android2 Browser |
Yes. Typing on the keypad can activate the address bar. Combination of D-pad, physical back button, and Menu Key can be used to adjust browser settings |
No |
Yes with exceptions: |
Yes with exceptions: |
Yes with exceptions: |
Android2** Opera Mobile |
No. |
No |
|
|
|
Android2** Dolphin Browser HD |
No with exceptions: |
No |
Yes, with exceptions: |
Yes, with exceptions: |
Yes, with exceptions: |
Open Research Avenues
- Strategies for raising awareness among developers (e.g. Automated mobile keyboard accessibility testing tools)
- The degree to which focus highlighting must be user-customizable on mobile.
- Comparison of strategies for non-sequential navigation on mobile.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge Bell Mobility and Komodo OpenLab for providing test devices and the Government of Ontario and the AEGIS Project for supporting development of Tecla Access.
References
- [1] "AndroidOS: About Explore by Touch". http://support.google.com/ics/nexus/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=2492750 (accessed March 2012).
- [2] "Tecla Access: About Tecla Access". http://mobile-accessibility.idrc.ocad.ca/projects/tekla (accessed March 2012).
- [3] Allan, J., Ford K., and Spellman, J. “User Agent Accessibility Guidelines 2.0” (2011). http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-UAAG20-20110719/
- [4] Safari setting: “Preferences > Advanced > Universal Access > Press Tab to highlight each item on a webpage”
- [5] "Mozilla: About Us Community Map Our Projects Get Involved Mozilla Keyboard Planning FAQ and Cross Reference". http://www.mozilla.org/access/keyboard/ (accessed March 2012).
- [6] AxS Lab. "iOS VoiceOver Gesture, Keyboard & Braille Shortcuts". http://axslab.com/articles/ios-voiceover-gestures-and-keyboard-commands.php (accessed March 2012).
- [7] "Android Issues: Issue 27022 Input method app cannot access built-in browser chrome" (http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=27022) (accessed March 2012).
- [8] Mozilla has announced they are working to increase accessibility in their mobile browser code-named “Fennec” (http://www.marcozehe.de/2012/05/08/first-round-of-accessibility-support-for-android-in-mobile-firefox/). However, this was announced after the testing for this paper.
- [9] With JavaScript disabled, the same barriers appear.