Assignment 1 · Accessibility Issue Recognition
1. Physical scenario: Taking out the trash
The shared dumpster at my apartment building, a 1962 walk-up in central Austin. I measured it against the 2010 ADA Standards.
None of this looks like a problem when you walk past it. That's why I went back and measured it.
The dumpster and it's surrounding
The Task
Taking out the trash
1
2
3
4
5
6
I didn't think about any of it at the time. None of these steps announces itself as a design problem. I only noticed them after going back with a measure app.
The same task from a seated position
What if a resident who uses a manual wheelchair makes the same trip? Four things get in the way.
Condition 1/4
The cross slope
According to the CDC, 13.7% of U.S. adults have a mobility disability, directly impacting their ability to navigate a 6-degree slope
1:48, or 1.2 degrees
6 to 7 degrees
ADA 403.3, 405.2, 405.7–405.9
Condition 2/4
Holding position
Scale section. The chair is drawn with its footplate against the container.
There's no rail, kerb or level landing next to the container. Anyone who needs a stable base to lift from runs into the same thing, including walker users.
30 by 48 in of level floor
Nowhere level to stop
ADA 305.3, 305.2
Condition 3/4
Opening the lid
So one hand holds the lid while the other lifts the bag.
One hand, 5 lbf maximum
Will not stay open
ADA 309.4
Measured to the front lip with the iPhone Measure app.
Condition 4/4
Reaching over the lip
Lowering the lip wouldn't fix this on its own, because the depth is the part no reach range covers.
Reach: 48 in high
47 in lip, 54 in deep
ADA 308.2, 308.3
Where the reach arc crosses lip height
The Problem
Analyzed and Visualized
Click through the sections, Built from the measurements above. Drag to orbit, flatten the pad to see how much of the problem is the paving on its own, and switch the camera to seated eye height.
No single condition is the whole problem.
Each one blocks a different group, and they stack. Fixing one of them wouldn't make the task possible, which is why a single improvement often doesn't feel like progress to the people affected.
The building predates the rules
In 1962 The building goes up. No law at the time asks whether a wheelchair user can reach the dumpster. In 1990 The ADA gets passed, but it doesn't apply retroactively to existing private housing. In March 1991, Fair Housing Act design requirements take effect, for multifamily housing first occupied after this date. This building predates that by 29 years.
What a tenant can do
The Fair Housing Act lets a disabled tenant modify common areas, and that right has no build-date cutoff. But the modification is generally at the tenant's own expense. So the person who can't use the dumpster is the one who'd pay to make it usable.
User types
Who else this affects
1
All four conditions block a wheelchair user, and three of them block someone using a walker or cane.
2
If you can't take out your own trash, you need someone else for a weekly task inside your own home. That dependence is the real cost.
3
Because the lid won't stay open, the bag goes in one-handed at full extension. Grip strength, reach and shoulder problems all show up here.
4
A 47 inch lip is also hard for shorter residents, for kids, for anyone with a shoulder injury, and for anyone carrying something in both arms.
50 units at one address. Using the CDC figures, you would expect a handful of residents with a mobility or independent living disability living there at any time, and that number rises with age, since 2 in 5 adults over 65 have a disability.
The four conditions also catch people the categories miss. Shorter residents, anyone with a shoulder injury, anyone carrying a bag in both arms. Those are temporary and situational, and they are not in any percentage.
What can be done
Immediate
Costs nothing
Move the container onto the flattest available paving
In a few weeks
Low capital
Swap to a lower, side-hinged or roll-top container
Put a level pad/base
Restripe so the approach is a route, not a bay
Long term
High capital
Build an enclosure with a level base
Put door collection into the accommodation policy
Trash can on each floor
Property management holds the budget and the hauler contract. Ask: move the container to the flat section, and write door collection into the accommodation policy.
Central Texas Refuse chose the container. Ask: what lower-lip or side-hinged models exist at this service level, and what does a swap cost?
Contractor or civil engineer prices and builds the pad. Ask: what does regrading to 1:48 cost, and can it ride along with the next resurfacing?
City permitting decides what a new pad triggers. Ask: does a level pad pull other accessibility obligations forward?
Residents who use chairs. Ask: walk me through how you do this now. You'd know workarounds I haven't thought of.
What I can do
As a product designer, I adapt to physical constraints rather than fighting them. While modifying the foundation isn't feasible, I can deconstruct the user workflow, benchmark each phase against established standards, and model the experience at seated eye height. I'd then package these findings into a case study to align stakeholders and drive actionable next steps.
Assignment 1 · Accessibility Issue Recognition
2. Digital scenario: Accessibility Obstacles in Mobile In-App Advertisements
The Problem
In most of the interstitial (full-screen) dynamic mobile advertisements displayed within third-party applications, the close button is excluded from the VoiceOver focus order or lacks an accessible name. VoiceOver reads internal ad elements (like loading percentages or looping between "Privacy" and "Open Store") but completely bypasses the exit point.
WCAG
Identified Failures
In interstitial (full-screen) dynamic mobile advertisements displayed within third-party applications, the close button is excluded from the VoiceOver focus order or lacks an accessible name. As observed in screen recordings, VoiceOver reads internal ad elements (like loading percentages or looping between "Privacy" and "Open Store") but completely bypasses the exit point.
No Keyboard Trap (Level A)
Screen reader users are trapped in a continuous focus loop. Swiping gestures only cycle through the ad's calls to action (e.g., "Swipe to move", "Play Now") without ever landing on a mechanism to close
Name, Role, Value (Level A)
Custom close buttons within the ad's view are not exposed to the iOS accessibility tree, preventing the screen reader from recognizing them as actionable UI elements.
Impact
Affected Populations
5.5 percent of US adults have a vision disability, and a portion of those use a screen reader daily. That is a smaller share than the physical case.
The difference is deployment. The same ad SDK ships inside thousands of apps. A UCI study tested 500 ad screens across 100 apps and found 84.4 percent had at least one accessibility problem. The barrier is not one pad at one address. It is one defect copied everywhere the SDK is installed.
Users cannot locate the exit to return to their original app. In practical testing, escaping required extreme workarounds, such as pulling down the iOS Control Center to manually disable VoiceOver, or intentionally clicking the ad to open App Store overlay just to access a functional Apple-standard "Close" button.
Users relying on sequential switch navigation or Voice Control face the exact same programmatic barrier as screen reader users because the close button is not exposed as a selectable node.
What can be done
Potential Solutions
1
Ad SDKs must use standard native controls (e.g., UIButton on iOS) for close actions, programmed with explicit labels: accessibilityLabel = "Close advertisement".
2
Programmatically shift accessibility focus directly to the close button as soon as the minimum required ad display time elapses.
3
Ensure the close element is explicitly included in the accessibility tree (i.e., not excluded from the view hierarchy or masked by custom game-engine canvases).
Stakeholders
Disciplinary Perspective & Team Collaboration
UX & Front-End Engineering
Mandate consistent, high-contrast close button placement and visible timer countdowns across all ad component specifications.
Enforce Accessibility APIs in Ad SDK configurations so custom webviews accurately expose their nodes to native screen reader layers.
Monetization/Ad Operations
Establish accessibility compliance as a strict contractual requirement for third-party ad networks before integrating their SDKs.
Integrate manual VoiceOver regression testing for all ad formats before pushing updates to production.
What I can do
As a product designer, I advocate for transparent digital experiences rather than relying on deceptive interface patterns. While controlling third-party ad content isn't always feasible, I can deconstruct the user's focus flow, prototype accessible close actions, and standardize tap targets against WCAG guidelines in my designs.
Comparison
Synthesis & Comparative Analysis
Both scenarios were measured the same way: take a routine task, break it into steps, and check each step against a published figure. Put side by side, they fail for different reasons but in the same shape.
Synergies
1
The chair reaches the container. The screen reader reaches the ad. What's missing in both is the way to finish and leave.
2
The lid opens, but not from a seated position. The close button works, but not in the accessibility tree. Neither is missing. Both are conditional, and that's harder to spot.
Differences
1
The building went up in 1962, before the ADA and before the Fair Housing Act design requirements. Nobody broke a rule. The ad shipped this year, and WCAG 2.1.2 and 4.1.2 have been Level A since 2018.
2
Regrading the pad needs concrete, a contractor and a permit. Fixing the ad takes one accessibility label. The expensive fix at least has a price and a path. The nearly free one is shipped unfixed across thousands of apps.
Summary
These two cases show that accessibility failures are usually not one bad decision. At the dumpster, four separate conditions stack up until the task becomes impossible, and none of them broke any rule that applied in 1962. In the ad, one missing property traps a screen reader user inside something they can't close, in a product covered by guidelines that have been in force for years. The physical barrier is expensive to fix and legally excusable. The digital one is nearly free to fix and isn't. In both, the mechanism for finishing the task exists and works, just not for the person in front of it. And in neither case does one party see the whole problem. My job here isn't to invent the fix. It's to measure the barrier well enough that the people who can fix it can see it.
References
Standards and law
U.S. Department of Justice. 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design. ada.gov
Sections used: 206.2.1 and 403.5.1 (accessible route), 302.1 (ground surfaces), 305.2 and 305.3 (clear floor space), 308.2 and 308.3 (reach ranges), 309.4 (operable parts), 403.3 (running and cross slope), 405.2 (ramp slope), 405.7 to 405.9 (landings, handrails, edge protection).Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Pub. L. 101-336.
Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, design and construction requirements. 24 CFR 100.205. See also HUD, Fair Housing Act Design Manual.
Fair Housing Act, reasonable modification provision. 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(A). HUD and DOJ Joint Statement on Reasonable Modifications Under the Fair Housing Act (2008).
W3C. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1. w3.org/TR/WCAG21/
Population data
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Disability Impacts All of Us infographic. cdc.gov/disability-and-health
Digital scenario
Apple. Human Interface Guidelines: Accessibility. developer.apple.com/design/human-interface-guidelines/accessibility
Apple Developer Documentation. UIAccessibility and accessibilityLabel. developer.apple.com/documentation/uikit/uiaccessibility
He, Z., Huq, S. F., and Malek, S. "I tend to view ads almost like a pestilence": On the Accessibility of Mobile In-App Advertisements. International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), 2024. University of California, Irvine. seal.ics.uci.edu/publications/2024_ICSE_AdMole.pdf
Google Play. Better Ads Experiences and disruptive ads policy. support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer
Site information
Travis County Appraisal District. Property record, 1802 West Ave, Austin TX. traviscad.org