Breadcrumb

Accessibility report

The University of Gothenburg is responsible for the SDSN Northern Europe website and wants as many as possible to be able to use it. This page describes how unsdsn-ne.org lives up to the Swedish law on accessibility to digital public service. It also describes any known issues, and how you can report flaws to us, so we can solve them. We are constantly working to make sure that the website fulfills the requirements set by law.

When the word "we" is used on this web page, it refers to the University of Gothenburg.

How accessible is the website?

We are aware that we currently do not succeed in meeting all the legal or technical requirements for accessibility to digital public service. We are working to solve the issues, to make sure that you receive the digital service you have a right to. 

Our ambition is not just to follow the law, but to give all the visitors of the website an experience where they can perceive, understand, and use all the contents and functionality, in as equal a way as possible, on a website that uses robust standards for its construction.

What can you do, if you can't use parts of the website?

If you need information from us in another format, then you can contact us by:

Reporting flaws

We are constantly working to improve the website's accessibility. If you discover problems that aren't described on this page, or if you believe we do not fulfill the requirements set by law, then we ask you to tell us, so we can try to solve this issue.

Supervision

The Swedish Agency for Digital Government (DIGG) is responsible for the supervision of the law on access to digital public services. If you are not pleased with how we handle your thoughts, then you can contact DIGG and let them know.

Technical information about the website's accessibility

This website is to a high degree compliant with level AA of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2.1 standard.

Known accessibility flaws of the website

Despite the website being to a high degree compliant, it does have flaws that we are working on removing. Content that isn't fully accessible is described here:

  • Parts of the content on the pages of the website reside within so-called landmarks, which haven't been named. This makes it difficult for users with screen readers to know their purpose.

  • Headlines and heading levels aren't always used correctly, which can cause difficulties for users with cognitive or vision impairment.

  • The inbuilt screen reader is not fully responsive and doesn't change the appearance for users browsing on phone, which makes it difficult to use.

  • Some links lead to external websites without notifying screen readers, using only visual icons to signal this.

  • Some links lead to external websites but indicate that they lead to an internal page, using visual icons to signal this.

  • Links to documents and external pages do not always describe where they lead to or that they are opened in a new browser window.

  • Content, structure, and functionality in PDF documents have not been audited for accessibility. Samples indicate a problem with accessibility.

  • In some places of the pages of the website, a clearer focus on where you are, when navigating with a keyboard or voice control, is needed.

  • In the main menu, and certain links, the difference between holding your mouse cursor over them and not, is too small. This is true for example for the menu link "Find News" and page internal menus for page content.

  • A so-called Aria Label is missing for the active link in the main menu, which prevents screen readers from telling what page in the main menu you are browsing.

  • Some images that carry significant content are missing a text description.

  • Text is commonly shown against a background image. This image also lacks text description.

  • Text is sometimes shown against a background image which contains text or distracting graphical patterns.

  • A smaller number of videos that require subtitles, transcription, or visual interpretation lacks this.

  • A smaller number of audio clips and podcasts lack text alternatives.

  • Certain text passages are written in another language than the surrounding text but aren't marked as such in the code. This causes problems for screen readers.

  • The website uses italicization for long quotes, which can make the text unnecessarily difficult to read.

How we have tested the website

We have done a self-estimation (internal audit) of the website using our own expertise. We have also, in the production of the website, had external experts audit parts of it.

Method for audit

Expertise and a number of accessibility testing tools.

The last audit was done on 25 October 2023.

The accessibility report was last updated on 25 October 2023.