Skip to main content

COVE Studio

Summary

Accessiblü conducted a high-level accessibility evaluation of the COVE Studio platform from COVE Collective to assess its usability for individuals with disabilities. The review was conducted using automated testing tools, keyboard-only navigation, and attempted manual inspection for conformance to select WCAG 2.2 AA success criteria.

Important Note: Due to a critical accessibility barrier encountered during testing, we were unable to complete the full screen reader evaluation using JAWS and NVDA assistive technologies. Upon loading the initial landing page, a user profile setup modal immediately appears with a non-functional close button for screen reader users, preventing access to the platform's core functionality.

Key Findings

The COVE Studio platform shows promise as a collaborative digital humanities tool, with some positive accessibility features evident in its design approach. However, a critical barrier at the entry point prevents screen reader users from accessing the platform entirely. This fundamental issue must be addressed to ensure equitable access to this valuable academic resource.

While the platform appears to have structured content organization and logical navigation patterns for sighted users, the inability to bypass the initial modal creates an immediate and complete accessibility failure that impacts the platform's usability for individuals who rely on assistive technologies.

Addressing the modal accessibility issue would unlock access to what appears to be a thoughtfully designed collaborative workspace, allowing researchers and academics with disabilities to fully participate in digital humanities projects.

Top 3 Issues Identified

  1. Critical Modal Accessibility Barrier

    • The initial user profile setup modal cannot be closed using screen readers (JAWS or NVDA), completely preventing access to the platform.
    • Impact: Screen reader users, individuals with motor disabilities who rely on keyboard navigation, and anyone using assistive technology cannot access the platform.
    • WCAG Success Criteria: 2.1.1 Keyboard (A), 2.1.2 No Keyboard Trap (A), 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value (A).

  2. Insufficient Alternative Text for Images

    • Document thumbnails and project images lack meaningful alternative text descriptions.
    • Impact: Screen reader users cannot understand the content or context of visual materials, limiting their ability to identify and select appropriate documents or projects.
    • WCAG Success Criteria: 1.1.1 Non-text Content (A).

  3. Interactive Element Accessibility

    • Various buttons and controls may lack proper labeling and keyboard accessibility based on automated testing results.
    • Impact: Users relying on assistive technology may not be able to identify the purpose of controls or activate them reliably.
    • WCAG Success Criteria: 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value (A), 2.1.1 Keyboard (A).

Disabilities Impacted

Blind and Low-Vision Users

  • Issues: The non-functional modal close button creates a complete access barrier, preventing entry to the platform. Additionally, missing alternative text for images and potentially inadequate screen reader support for interface elements.
  • Impact: Users who rely on screen readers are completely unable to access the COVE Studio platform, preventing participation in collaborative digital humanities projects and research activities.

Users with Motor Disabilities

  • Issues: The modal cannot be dismissed using keyboard commands, creating a keyboard trap. Additional navigation elements may not be fully keyboard accessible.
  • Impact: Keyboard-only users become trapped at the initial modal and cannot proceed to use the platform's collaborative features, effectively excluding them from digital humanities workflows.

Users with Cognitive Disabilities

  • Issues: Unclear interface labeling and potentially inconsistent navigation patterns may create confusion, though the modal barrier limited full evaluation.
  • Impact: Users who benefit from clear, consistent interface design and predictable interaction patterns may struggle to navigate the platform effectively once the modal issue is resolved.