SayPro Accessibility Review: Documentation and Prioritization

SayPro Accessibility Review Document accessibility gaps and prioritize them based on severity and user impact from SayPro Monthly February SCMR-17 SayPro Monthly Inclusive Design: Ensure the site is accessible to users with disabilities by SayPro Online Marketplace Office under SayPro Marketing Royalty SCMR

Introduction

The goal of this accessibility review is to identify, document, and prioritize accessibility gaps in the SayPro website. Accessibility gaps can be categorized by their severity and the impact they have on users with disabilities. This process will provide a clear roadmap for improving the accessibility of the website, in line with SayPro Monthly February SCMR-17 and SayPro Marketing Royalty SCMR guidelines. The website’s compliance with accessibility standards will be assessed using both automated tools and manual testing.

1. Accessibility Gaps Identification

The accessibility audit is divided into several categories, each targeting specific barriers that may impact users with various disabilities, including those with visual impairments, hearing impairments, motor disabilities, and cognitive challenges. The review will identify issues in areas such as keyboard navigation, color contrast, image alt text, audio/video content, dynamic content, and more.

1.1 Categories of Accessibility Gaps

1. Visual Accessibility
   • Color contrast issues: Text or elements may not have sufficient contrast against the background, making them difficult to read for users with low vision or color blindness.
   • Missing or incorrect alt text for images: Images, icons, and other non-text content lack descriptive alt text for screen reader users.
   • Lack of resizable text: Text that cannot be resized may make it difficult for users with low vision to access content.
2. Hearing Accessibility
   • Missing captions or transcripts for video/audio: Videos or audio content lack captions, subtitles, or transcripts for users who are deaf or hard of hearing.
   • No visual indicators for sound cues: Important sound notifications or cues lack visual alternatives, making them inaccessible to users who cannot hear.
3. Motor Accessibility
   • Inaccessible keyboard navigation: Certain interactive elements are not accessible via keyboard, creating barriers for users who rely on keyboard-only navigation or assistive technologies.
   • Lack of sufficient focus indicators: Interactive elements (e.g., buttons, form fields) do not have clear focus indicators, which may confuse users relying on keyboard navigation or screen readers.
4. Cognitive Accessibility
   • Complex or unclear language: Content that is difficult to read or understand, which can be problematic for users with cognitive disabilities or learning difficulties.
   • Inconsistent or cluttered layout: A website layout that is confusing or inconsistent across pages, which can make it difficult for users with cognitive impairments to navigate.
   • No clear error messages or feedback: Forms or interactive elements that do not provide clear error messages or guidance on how to correct mistakes.
5. General Usability Issues
   • Responsive design issues: The site may not be fully functional on mobile devices or when zoomed in, affecting users with motor impairments or users who rely on touch devices.

---

2. Severity and User Impact Prioritization

Once the accessibility gaps are identified, they need to be prioritized based on their severity (how critical the issue is) and their user impact (how many or how severely users with disabilities are affected). This will ensure that the most urgent and impactful issues are addressed first.

2.1 Severity Levels

Severity refers to the level of disruption caused by the accessibility issue. This can be categorized into critical, major, and minor severity levels.

1. Critical Severity:
   • Issues that completely block access to important content or functionality for users with disabilities. These should be fixed immediately.
   • Examples: Missing alt text for essential images, broken keyboard navigation for form submissions, videos without captions.
2. Major Severity:
   • Issues that impede or significantly degrade the experience for users with disabilities, but do not completely block access. These should be addressed within a short timeframe (e.g., 1-2 weeks).
   • Examples: Low color contrast on key text, missing error messages on forms, poor focus management on interactive elements.
3. Minor Severity:
   • Issues that do not majorly affect functionality but still reduce the overall user experience. These should be addressed after critical and major issues are resolved.
   • Examples: Slightly inconsistent use of ARIA roles, redundant links or content that could confuse screen reader users, minor visual design issues.

2.2 User Impact Levels

User impact refers to the extent to which the issue affects users with disabilities. This can be categorized into high, medium, and low impact.

1. High Impact:
   • The issue affects a large number of users or severely impacts their ability to use the website effectively.
   • Examples: A major navigation issue preventing users with motor disabilities from accessing key pages, missing captions on all video content, or no keyboard navigation.
2. Medium Impact:
   • The issue affects a moderate number of users or moderately impairs the usability of the website.
   • Examples: Missing alt text for images that are not essential to the core content or functionality, or unclear language in some sections of the website.
3. Low Impact:
   • The issue affects few users or has a minor effect on the user experience.
   • Examples: A small color contrast issue on non-essential text or redundant link text that could be clarified.

2.3 Prioritization Matrix

After categorizing each issue by severity and impact, a prioritization matrix is used to determine the order in which issues should be addressed:

Impact \ Severity	Critical	Major	Minor
High	Top Priority	High Priority	Medium Priority
Medium	High Priority	Medium Priority	Low Priority
Low	Medium Priority	Low Priority	Low Priority

• Top Priority: Critical and high-impact issues must be fixed immediately, as they completely block access for users with disabilities or severely degrade their experience.
• High Priority: Major and high-impact issues should be resolved promptly, as they impede users’ ability to interact with the site.
• Medium Priority: Issues that are critical but affect fewer users or have moderate severity should be fixed after high-priority issues.
• Low Priority: Minor issues with low impact can be addressed last or as part of a future update.

---

3. Documentation of Accessibility Gaps

For each identified accessibility gap, provide the following documentation:

1. Description of the Issue:
   • Clearly describe the accessibility gap, using both technical and user-friendly language.
   • Example: “The alt text for images in the product carousel is missing. This prevents screen reader users from understanding the images and their context.”
2. Category:
   • Specify which accessibility category the issue falls under (visual, hearing, motor, cognitive, etc.).
   • Example: “Visual Accessibility – Missing alt text.”
3. Severity:
   • Indicate the severity level of the issue (critical, major, minor).
   • Example: “Major severity – Missing alt text for key content images on the product page.”
4. User Impact:
   • Provide an estimate of how many users are impacted and the level of impairment caused.
   • Example: “High user impact – This issue affects all screen reader users who are unable to interact with the site effectively.”
5. Recommendation:
   • Provide a recommended fix or solution for each issue.
   • Example: “Add descriptive alt text for all images in the product carousel to ensure screen readers can properly interpret the content.”
6. Priority Level:
   • Based on the prioritization matrix, assign a priority level (Top, High, Medium, Low).
   • Example: “High priority.”

---

4. Conclusion and Next Steps

Documenting and prioritizing accessibility gaps will create a clear roadmap for improving the SayPro website’s accessibility. The next steps include:

1. Implementing Fixes: Start with critical and high-priority issues and move on to lower-priority items once the major barriers are removed.
2. Testing and Verification: After each fix, perform both automated and manual testing to ensure the issue is resolved and that no new barriers have been introduced.
3. Ongoing Monitoring: Set up a regular accessibility audit cycle to ensure that the site remains compliant and continues to improve its accessibility.