An Expert-Based Usability Evaluation of the EvalAccess Web Service: Summary

The article "An Expert-Based Usability Evaluation of the EvalAccess Web Service" explores the
usability evaluation conducted on the EvalAccess web service, which is a tool designed to
automatically evaluate the accessibility of web pages. The writers emphasize the increasing
importance of internet activities and the role of web accessibility in ensuring equal access to
information and services for all users, including those with disabilities.

The article explains that while various initiatives and accessibility laws have been established to
promote web accessibility, the availability of tools that support universal design is equally
crucial. EvalAccess was created as a web service to be used by other applications, but a user
interface was later developed to enable direct usage by web developers and evaluators. This
decision was driven by the realization that the interface could also be valuable for users
interested in performing web accessibility evaluations themselves.

Recognizing the need for a thorough usability evaluation, the writers conducted an assessment
of the EvalAccess user interface. Usability, among the essential criteria for evaluation tools, was
considered the primary requirement. To evaluate usability, two expert-based usability inspection
methods were employed: Guideline Reviews and Heuristic Evaluation.

Guideline Reviews involve experts analyzing the interface's adherence to a comprehensive list
of usability guidelines. In this case, the Nielsen & Tahir sets of Homepage Usability Guidelines
were used. The advantage of this method is that it allows for structured evaluations without
requiring extensive formal training. However, the writers acknowledge that some guidelines may
be vague or contradictory, and applying a large number of guidelines can become tedious.

Heuristic Evaluation, on the other hand, involves a small group of experts examining the
interface based on established usability principles or general rules that describe common
properties of usable interfaces. While this method is relatively easy to use and cost-effective, the
results can be influenced by the subjective experiences of the experts and may occasionally
yield "false alarms." The heuristics proposed by Molich and Nielsen, as well as Nielsen's own
heuristics, are among the most widely used and validated.