The accessibility of our design work is coming under greater and greater scrutiny, but this is no bad thing. As designers, we play a big role in creating the world around us. So, we have the responsibility to help design an inclusive world for everyone.
Accessible design is one way that we can do this.
But we experience a lot of pushback from designers, believing that accessible design equals boring, not creative and basic. This isn’t true, or it doesn’t have to be. But I think there is something bigger behind these worries. I think it might be linked to how we are assessing accessible design.
Accessible design is a huge topic, and guidelines help us to make sense of it. It’s hard, or even impossible, to make judgements based on our senses, especially if we aren’t living with some of the disabilities we are designing for. It’s so important that we have a set of ‘rules’ that help us know what will make something more accessible for those who are experiencing disabilities.
A clear set of rules also helps more people pick up accessible design, it can help them break up what can seem like a mammoth task into smaller targets to aim for over time. So resources like the WCAG and organisations like UKAAF are really important.
However, I think the way we are now using them is too broad for what the WCAG was set out to solve.
So, if we want to make a real effort to design a more inclusive world and retain its beautiful creativity, it might be time to set out some more tailored guidance.
Guidance that works for the tools of our trade
There is a reason that designers are finding it difficult to follow WCAG and still create beautiful work. WCAG was created for web content, not all content. As designers working across print and digital, the way that our tools work on websites versus other channels (print, PDFs, etc) is very different. WCAG is brilliant if you are looking for guidance on web design. Outside of that, we come across some conflict, where the rules don’t really reflect the reality of our work.
1. Typefaces are all built differently
This is often the first place where these conflicts arise. How we design using typefaces. The WCAG guidelines around the size and spacing of typefaces. However, in reality, the way a designer will set one typeface versus another will differ. Based on the proportions of the letters.
How one typeface looks in 12pt with 150% leading compared with another can vary drastically. The choices the type designer chose around the x-height versus the length of the ascenders and descenders will affect how ‘big’ the typeface looks when set at 12 pt. This works just the same with line-height; the visual effect of this will always be impacted by the proportions of the letter shapes.
So it is unlikely that two typefaces set following the same rules will lead to a similar level of legibility. Are we actually making text less accessible by putting in blanket rules like this?
It might seem complicated, but a system based not on flat point size rules, but around proportion and ratios could likely work better.
2. Colour contrast is outdated
Looking at colour contrast is so important when considering the accessibility of your designs. And the fact that there are so many tools out there now to help us determine ‘good’ contrast versus ‘bad’ is great.
However, the way that colour contrast is measured for screens is fairly basic at the moment. It measures the difference between one colour and another, but if you know your colour theory, you know there’s much more to it than that.
WCAG is well aware of this, and in the next round of guidance (WCAG 3), they will be moving over to the more nuanced APCA (Accessible Perceptual Contrast Algorithm). This is great news, but it’s going to take a while to be released.
APCA is a far more nuanced system for measuring colour contrast, taking into account the differences between foreground and background colour as well as a fuller range of type sizes. This means that text for a billboard doesn’t have to be judged the same way as 18pt type for an annual report heading is, which makes sense.
Businesses wanting to ensure they are meeting ‘accessibility standards’ require a solid benchmark to measure themselves against, and so the officially accepted standard of WCAG (used by governments worldwide) is an important tool for them. WCAG 3 will take years to complete, and in the meantime, we are all following guidance that we know is a bit outdated, yet comes with the gold sticker of compliance. Essentially sacrificing real accessibility for the sake of bureaucracy. We can do better than that.
Is there a way that graphic designers can build APCA guidance into their initial designs, or even their own set of guidelines?
3. Print has been left behind
Print colour is complicated. That is understandable. The myriad of factors (paper stock colour, coating and weight) make creating a system for assessing printed colour contrast nearly impossible. However, if we look outside our own industry, to industrial design, there is a system in use.
LRV (light reflective value) is commonly used to assess the accessibility of public spaces - the visual contrast between this handrail and the wall colour behind it will be determined by the LRVs of the two surfaces. If this can be applied in a context as complicated as our physical environment, can it not be applied to print?
If it can, there is the potential that a new framework that includes APCA and potentially draws from the LRV used in industrial design could really help to create a more accurate and designer-friendly system.
Guidance that is user-friendly (accessible!)
If my last point on colour made your head spin a little, don’t worry, I am with you. And I think this is part of the problem.
Accessibility guidance can get really complicated to follow, and this makes the advice on accessibility… well, kind of inaccessible to most people.
Guidance is scattered across many different sources. From the WCAG, to the PDF/UA to UKAAF’s guidelines on large print documents. This means understanding accessible design takes a lot of time and resources, or specific training.
The advice is also complicated. The WCAG was created for developers to use, not marketing managers, not heads of brand. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, developers need the technical detail. But it’s not just developers using the WCAG anymore, so we need to be more inclusive.
Guidance that can be picked up by anyone, that dovetails with other more technical guidance like the WCAG or PDF/UA, would help to ensure that accessibility is picked up by a wider range of people. Helping to create a more accessible world.
Clear, transparent research and sources
As design agencies and brands, we often don’t have the budgets for our own focus groups and research to help us decide what is accessible and what isn’t. So organisations like WebAIM are a precious resource.
But transparency is important, especially around topics like disability inclusion. Currently, it’s very difficult to find out how many people with lived experience of disabilities were consulted during the creation of the guidelines we currently follow. It’s important that we make sure any guidance is really going to help our designs to positively impact those who need it most.
It’s not just about accountability though; guidelines that point to solid evidence would help those wanting to convince others to invest in the accessibility of their brand. Helping to promote investment in this area, and create a bigger impact for those most affected.
Brand accessibility is an important part of creating a more inclusive world, but implementing more accessible design with brands at the moment comes with some considerable challenges. New guidance created by designers, for designers and the wider content and marketing community could help us design a more accessible world.
Creating something like this is no small task. It will need a community of designers behind it, and investment of time and money.
But I think the results would be worth it. What do you say?
Lana Zoppi, Design Director at Studio Noel has over a decade of diverse experience in design agencies across industries such as hospitality, retail, property, not-for-profit, charity, education, and publishing, Lana specialises in harmonising design with strategic depth to elevate brands.