Key Insights

• •

  Starting prototype reviews with screen magnification users offers high impact with minimal adaptation.

• •

  Screen magnification users benefit from graphical prototypes because they can magnify visuals and assess color contrast and text size directly.

• •

  Users with physical challenges may need researchers to operate prototypes on their behalf due to assistive tech limitations, especially with hover and click targets.

• •

  Screen reader users require prototypes with semantic markup like proper heading levels, labeled controls, and landmarks, which traditional wireframes usually lack.

• •

  Prototyping tools like Figma and Adobe currently have limited accessibility support for screen reader users but are actively researching improvements.

• •

  Building prototypes for screen reader users often involves using document-based tools like Microsoft Word or Google Docs to show semantic structure and text equivalents.

• •

  Hover interactions pose significant challenges for users relying on alternative navigation methods such as switch systems or head mice.

• •

  Control labeling consistency in prototypes is crucial to avoid confusion, particularly for those using voice dictation or alternative input.

• •

  Low vision users who do not fully rely on screen readers are the largest group benefiting from improved prototype accessibility.

• •

  Mobile accessibility considerations largely mirror desktop concerns, with screen size and gesture differences being the main changes.

Notable Quotes