Accessibility Statement for the Archives Hub
This accessibility statement applies to the Archives Hub service: https://archiveshub.jisc.ac.uk. It is run by Jisc.
We want as many people as possible to be able to use this website. For example, that means you should be able to:
- zoom in up to 300%
- navigate most of the site using a keyboard
- change colours, contrast levels and fonts
We’ve also made the website text as simple as possible to understand.
AbilityNet has advice on making your device easier to use if you are disabled.
How accessible the website is
We know some parts of this website are not fully accessible. We have listed the issues in our technical section, below.
Feedback and contact information
If you need information on this website in a different format, please contact us and we will do our best to meet your needs:
Reporting accessibility problems with this website
We’re always looking to improve the accessibility of this website. If you find any problems not listed on this page or think we’re not meeting accessibility requirements, please let us know.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is responsible for enforcing the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018 (the ‘accessibility regulations’). If you’re not happy with how we respond to your complaint, contact the Equality Advisory and Support Service (EASS)
Technical information about this website's accessibility
Jisc is committed to making its websites accessible, in accordance with the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018.
This website is partially compliant with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2.1 AA standard, due to the non-compliances listed below.
The content listed below is non-accessible for the following reasons
The Archives Hub uses Open Street Map. We don't have an accessible alternative and, as we don't control the platform, are unable to make changes. However, it is not integral to the service functionality, but rather provides a way of viewing locations, which are all included in the data and can be searched via the interface.
The YouTube videos we provide may not meet accessibility guidelines, but these are not integral to the service; rather they are usually for our contributors as additional guides and aids to contributing. If anyone needs alternatives, for example, a guide on how to contribute, please email us.
We embed pop-up HotJar surveys on the site to collect occasional user feedback. We know there are accessibility issues, but at present we don’t have a more accessible alternative which meets our requirements around GDPR and Information Security. We have raised the issues with HotJar, who are working on changes to make their surveys fully accessible. At present they do not have an estimated completion date for this project. Where we include a HotJar survey, we will always provide users with a link to a more accessible alternative at the start.
Hotjar Non-compliance with the accessibility regulations
1. The button to open/close the survey panel has no text alternative. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 (Non-text Content) [Level A]. 2. The survey panel label does not have descriptive enough text. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criteria 1.1.1 (Non-text Content, level A) and 2.4.6 (Headings and Labels) [Level AA]. 3. The survey panel content is not included in an HTML5 or WAI-ARIA landmark. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 (Info and Relationships) [Level A]. 4. The Hotjar branding link is not underlined. This fails WCAG 2.1 success Criterion 1.4.1 (Use of Color [Level A]. 5. Disabled buttons have poor colour contrast. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.3 (Contrast (Minimum)) [Level AA] and WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.11 (Non-Text Contrast) [Level AA]. 6. When a user resizes text to 200% the size of text and controls do not change. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.4 (Resize text) [Level AA]. 7. Radio buttons, checkboxes and text areas have poor colour contrast. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.11 (Non-Text Contrast) [Level AA]. 8. The button to open/close the survey panel, radio buttons, checkboxes, textareas, the “Next” button, the “Skip” button, the “Close” button and the Hotjar brand link do not have a visible focus indicator. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.7 (Focus Visible) [Level AA]. 9. Radio buttons and checkboxes do not have a “name” attribute, so the accessible name does not match the visible label. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.5.3 (Label in Name) [Level A]. 10. The button to submit each “screen” of the survey is not a form submit button. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criteria 3.2.2 (On Input) [Level A] and 4.1.2 (Name, Role, Value) [Level A]. 11. The name and role of the button to open/close the survey panel cannot be programmatically determined. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 (Name, Role, Value) [Level A].
How we tested Hotjar third party software
We assessed the Hotjar survey software tool against WCAG 2.1 AA using: Manual techniques, Firefox accessibility inspector, SiteImprove browser extension for Chrome, Axe browser extension for Chrome, noting this was not capable of testing inside the Hotjar panel
Content of the static site
- No A or AA violations
- Colour contrast has been flagged for review. We have looked at this and believe that the contrast is appropriate.
Content of the search interface
- Colour contrast has been flagged for some text, and this will be improved where it does not meet AA guidelines - WCAG: 1.4.3
- HTML elements will be given 'lang' attributes where these are absent WCAAG: 3.1.1
- Form elements will be given labels - WCAG: 1.3.1, 4.1.2
- Images will be given alternate text where this is absent WCAG: 1.1.1
- Links will be given aria-labels (including ToC hierarchy icons) - WCAG: 2.4.4, 4.1.2
- List markup will be corrected - WCAG: 1.3.1
Issues with PDFs and Word Documents
Many of our older PDFs and Word documents don’t meet accessibility standards - for example, they may not be marked up so they’re accessible to a screen reader. This doesn’t meet WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 (name, role value). Any new PDFs or Word documents we publish should meet accessibility standards.
Preparation of this accessibility statement
This statement was prepared on 17 August 2020. It was last reviewed on 4 September 2020.