A MDA-based Approach for Enabling Accessibility Adaptation
of User Interface for Disabled People
Lamia Zouhaier , Yousra Bendaly Hlaoui and Leila Jemni Ben Ayed
Laboratory LaTICE, Higher School of Sciences and Technologies of Tunis, University of Tunis, Tunis, Tunisia
Keywords: MDA, Transformation, Accessibility, Handicap, User Interface, Adaptation, Context-aware.
Abstract: In order to eliminate accessibility barriers that may exist in the user interface at runtime, we propose, in this
paper, to integrate accessibility into an infrastructure of adaptation of User Interfaces. Hence, we propose a
model driven approach which consists of generating, automatically, accessibility adapted User Interfaces.
To reach this goal, based on MDA principals, we develop different meta-model transformations to provide
an adapted User Interface model according to received accessibility context information and a given non
adapted User Interface.
1 INTRODUCTION
Accessibility is considered as a very crucial issue of
research in Human Computer Interactions (HCI) as
it requires more investment in terms of technology
and investigation. This is due to the big requirements
imposed by the diversity of disabilities, including
visual, auditory, physical, speech, cognitive,
language, learning, and neurological disabilities
(ISO, 2008).
In fact, accessibility is quite difficult to achieve.
This difficulty is due to diverse factors, including the
lack of proper development methods, authoring tools
and accessibility training for professionals (Miñón,
2013). To reduce this complexity, we need a generic
solution which is compliant to disable user
requirements and best accommodates their particular
needs. Therefore, we propose a generic MDA-based
solution of adapting application’s interface to
accessibility context. One of the principal
advantages of MDA (OMG, 2001); (Vanderdonckt,
2005) is the capacity to cover all the domains used
in information system. Moreover, the MDA
separates Independent Platform Models (PIM) from
Specific Platform Models (PSM) and concrete
models. Therefore, PSMs and concrete models will
be generated by automatic transformations.
In fact, when a disable user wants to accede to a
service such as bank service or healthcare service
offered by an application through the internet, but
he/she doesn’t dispose of his/her PC and he/she has
only his Smartphone. In this case, the application
must be adapted to the new situation of use. The new
context includes the handicap characteristics, the
location, the physical environment (noise, light), and
the targeted plateform used. The application has to
be able to detect the current state of context and the
new context in the ambient environment. Hence, it
has to determine what actions to take based on this
acquired contextual information.
Recently, these problems have motivated various
researches to define features for interface‘s
adaptation according to the context change.
However, few of them such as (Stephandis, 2001)
(Abscal, 2011); (Peißner, 2012); (Manca, 2013) have
investigated on adaptation to accessibility context
but they have not proposed generic solutions.
Our contribution consists of developing a generic
solution of accessibility-aware in a model based
approach that combines a set of recommendations
required by ISO 9241-171 (ISO, 2008) and WCAG
2.0 (ISO, 2012) and integrates them into an
adaptation process as adaptation rules.
In fact, our approach starts by defining the
accessibility context model and the given application
UI model. Then, the accessibility context model will
be mapped into an ontology model. The latter
represents the semantics of the accessibility context
defined by high-level context properties. These
properties are acquired from sensors related to
environment, platform and user. Moreover, the
adaptation process, which has as input the
accessibility context model and the application UI
120
Zouhaier L., Hlaoui Bendaly Y. and Jemni Ben Ayed L..
A MDA-based Approach for Enabling Accessibility Adaptation of User Interface for Disabled People.
DOI: 10.5220/0004897901200127
In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS-2014), pages 120-127
ISBN: 978-989-758-029-1
Copyright
c
2014 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.)
model, is based on these context properties which
are considered as conditions of the model
transformation. The output of the adaptation process
is the adapted application UI model. As we follow
the MDA principals (Vanderdonckt, 2005) (OMG,
2001), the new adapted interface is generated using a
model transformation from the adapted application
UI model relatively to a specific platform and
implementation environment.
The remainder of this paper is structured as
follows: in section 2, we present the most relevant
existing works related to accessibility, adaptation
and even the model-based approaches for the
adaptation of the UI. Section 3 presents our
accessibility context model. In section 4, we
describe our approach based on model
transformations. Finally, section 5 concludes the
paper and presents our future research.
2 RELATED WORK
Several approaches [(Stephanidis, 1998)
(Akoumianakis, 1999); (Thevenin, 1999); (Calvary,
2002); (Bouchelliga, 2010); (Lopez, 2003); (Bacha,
2011); (Abscal, 2011); (Zbaidi, 2011); (Brossard,
2011); (Peißner, 2012); (Bongartz, 2012); (Manca,
2013); (Minon, 2013a); (Oliveira, 2013) have been
proposed in the field of adaptation of human
machine interfaces to context.
Some works [(Stephanidis, 1998)
(Akoumianakis, 1999); (Lopez, 2003)] have focused
on accessibility problem. They have tried to give
some solutions in specific domains of applications
(web-applications, healthcare, assistive-live, etc.).
However, no generic and improved solution has
been proposed in these works. Also, in the area of
accessibility, others works have focused on
adaptation using assistive technology solutions, but
this remains still insufficient with the progress of
technology.
Different adaptation’s approaches have been
based on context-awareness mechanisms specifying
disabled people (Stephanidis, 1998);
(Akoumianakis, 1999); (Lopez, 2003); (Abscal,
2011); (Peißner, 2012); (Manca, 2013). Among
these works, some have stressed on context capture
(Dey, 2000) and others on adaptation (Thevenin,
1999); (Calvary, 2002) by the use of legacy
architectures and artifacts to input context into
application logic (Vale, 2008).
Few works have been focused on identifying
generic solutions for generating adapted user
interfaces to various combinations of context
[(Thevenin, 1999); (Calvary, 2002); (Bouchelliga,
2010); (Bacha, 2011); (Brossard, 2011);
(Bontagartz, 2012); (Oliveira, 2013); (Minon,
2013)]. Thevenin et al. (Thevenin, 1999); (Calvary,
2002) have proposed a novel technique of adaptation
called plasticity. It is a recent and emerged method
of adaptation which denotes the capacity of an
interactive system to withstand to context variations
while preserving usability. In order to support the
end-user preferences, adaptations rules can be
changed according to user’s order. It results from a
Situation-Reaction process where the situation
denotes a context change that needs a reaction, and
reaction denotes the procedures that the system
and/or the user executes to preserve usability.
However, the solution doesn’t consider netheir
accessibility context nor model-based solution of
adaptation.
On the other hand, to generate accessible adapted
User Interfaces (UI) according to the context’s
change, we can mention two principals’ projects:
AVANTI (Stephanidis, 1998) and EGOKI (Abascal,
2011).
AVANTI (Stephanidis, 1998) is the first project
to employ adaptive techniques in order to ensure
accessibility and high quality of interaction for all
potential users. It put forward a conceptual
framework for the construction of systems that
support adaptability and adaptivity at both the
content and the user interface levels (Stephandis,
2001). The distinctive characteristic of the AVANTI
browser is its ability to dynamically tailor itself to
the abilities, skills, requirements, and preferences of
the end-users, to the different contexts of use, and to
the changing characteristics of users as they interact
with the system.
EGOKI (Abascal, 2011) is a system that
generates accessible mobile user interfaces adapted
for people with disabilities in order to grant them
access to ubiquitous services. These interfaces are
intended to provide access to ubiquitous services in
intelligent environments. EGOKI dynamically
creates an instance of the interface running on the
user device. To adapt the interface to the user
characteristics, it is necessary to take into account
what the most suitable communication modalities
are for each user, mapping them to the appropriate
media.
EGOKI and AVANTI projects have not
considered neither presentation of UI in the
adaptation process nor new guidelines as ISO 9241-
171 at design process of UI.
The accessibility of application interfaces should
be considered at an early step of the application
AMDA-basedApproachforEnablingAccessibilityAdaptationofUserInterfaceforDisabledPeople
121
development. Only few researches, such as works
presented in (Abscal, 2011); (Miñón, 2011) (Manca,
2013), have been devoted to adapt the content,
presentation or the navigation scheme of the user
interface to users with special needs.
Although, the notion of context was defined
long time ago, few works (Hachani, 2009);
(Bouchelliga, 2010); (Bacha, 2011); (Oliveira, 2013)
have considered it to be integrated into an
application modeling. They have proposed model-
based approaches for user interface‘s adaptation.
The latter consists of generating the final interface
which matches the new captured context.
Hachani (Hachani, 2009) has proposed a generic
method for adapting the context sensitive user
interfaces. He has developed generic and reusable
transformation rules which are appropriate to all
contexts of use. He has been interested to the
adaptation of language and screen size to the
platform. However, he did not give detailed
description of each element of the context of use.
Bouchelliga et al., (Bouchelliga, 2010) have
proposed a MDE approach for plastic HCI. UI
adaptation has considered various aspects of context
and has been based on parameterized transformation.
The authors have provided meta-models of different
contexts used in the approach to adapt the interface.
Bacha et al. (Bacha, 2011) have presented a
MDA approach for UI that have considered the
content personalization since early in the design
stage. The idea is to define the information which
can be personalized while designing the interface.
But, this approach could not previously define all
potential content personalization during the design
time.
However, none of these studies have considered
accessibility context into adaptation process using
model based development using MDA.
3 ACCESSIBILITY CONTEXT
We start by defining what a context is Dey (Dey,
2001) has given a definition that is widely used in
literature: “Context is any information that can be
used to characterize the situation of entities (i.e.,
whether a person, place or object) that are
considered relevant to the interaction between a user
and an application, including the user and the
application themselves”.
According to (Rhee, 2012), the main
functionalities of a context model are (1) deriving
higher-level environmental context knowledge from
sensory input data, (2) providing knowledge to other
modules of application, and (3) updating the
knowledge on runtime.
Our context model has to cover all requirements
in the accessibility. Hence, it must to be generic and
useful for any domain and for any UI generation.
Generally, a context is defined as a triplet (user,
environment, plateform) (Thevenin, 1999) (Calvary,
2002) (Vanderdonckt, 2005) (Sottet, 2006). It is
generated by context sensors which automatically
observe the user and measure some relevant
environmental parameters (noise, light, etc ...)
relatively to his/her current situation within the
interaction. Unfortunately, it is manually generated
actually.
In our approach, we define the accessibility
context through the following dimensions or
elements:
A. TechContext: includes information related to the
technologies used in the interaction namely
platform (PDA, PC, phone, etc.), communication
and software. Software information represents
the software installed on the device which can be
used as assistive technology or as sensors. While
communication information represents any
communication technology such as WiFi,
Bluetooth, connection internet Network, etc.
B. AccessibilityContext: is mainly based on the user
context (profile, disability, ability, history,
preferences, etc.) and accessibility barriers faced
by the disabled in interaction with the interface.
C. EnvironmentConditions: includes any contextual
information of physical conditions (temperature,
light, sound, pressure, etc. . .).
D. Location: specifies the location where the
context is defined and created (absolute position,
relative position, etc.).
E. TimeContext: determines the exactly time (hour,
minute, second) and date when a context is
changed.
Table 1 recapitulates all the presented accessibility
context dimensions and their relative information.
4 A MDA APPROACH FOR
ADAPTATING ACCESSBILITY
CONTEXT TO IHM
The Model Driven Architecture (OMG, 2012) has
gained attention from human-computer interface
community due to its capability of code generation
from abstract models to concrete models.
Therefore, we propose a model driven approach
ICEIS2014-16thInternationalConferenceonEnterpriseInformationSystems
122
Table 1: Context Model including Accessibility Context.
Context dimensions Information
Accessibility
Context
Handicap
Profile (user identification)
Interests/preferences
User demographics data
Language skills
Disability
Static
Temporary
Type
User state
Accessibility
Barriers
Navigation
Presentation
Content
Modality
TechContext
Hardware
Software
Network
EnvironmentConditions
Noise
Light
Location
Adress (street, postal code, city)
Absolute position, relative position
TimeContext
Hour
Date
for generating accessibility adapted application‘s
interface. This approach improves the capacity of
managing the context inside the adaptation process
at runtime. It allows the integration of accessibility
requirements into adaptation process and the
generation of the final interface. Moreover, we
propose the use of different transformations at
different abstraction levels according to received
contextual information about accessibility.
This approach aims to provide an infrastructure
of automatic adaptation and generation of user
interfaces based on application’s user interface
model and model accessibility context development.
Figure 1 illustrates the approach steps:
1. Step 1: first, we provide an abstract view of the
user interface using retro-engineering techniques.
The abstract view represents a non adapted Platform
Independent Model (PIM A). Then we reorganize all
captured contextual information from different
sources with considering accessibility context. In
fact, we collect all information relative to the
accessibility context to build a generic and robust
accessibility context model which will be mapped to
an ontology model in order to give semantic
interoperability. We use an ontology model in order
to manage high-level context properties acquired
from sensors related to environment, plateform and
user.
2. Step 2: we specify and use the adaptation process
which transforms the interface model (PIM A),
according to the ontology model and based on
adaptation rules, to an adapted interface model (PIM
B).
Figure 1: Model driven approach for adapting an
accessibility context into a UI.
3. Step 3: using the adapted application model,
which represents the output of the adaptation
process, we generate the Platform Specific Model of
the adapted UI (PSM) and then the relative code,
depending of application platform, using
simultaneously PIM2PSM and PSM2Code
transformations.
AMDA-basedApproachforEnablingAccessibilityAdaptationofUserInterfaceforDisabledPeople
123
4.1 Ontology-based Modelling of
Accessibility Context Model
Context-aware applications are usually relied on a
data structure or information repository called the
context model. This model handles the processing
and abstraction of contextual information. Context
models were designed to describe contextual
situations and to represent semantic relations
between contexts in order to allow applications to
make use of this information (Arrue et al., 2007).
Ontologies and contexts are both used to model
views, which are different perspectives of a domain
(Abascal et al., 2011). There is why our approach is
an ontology-based context model. We define an
accessibility ontology that organizes the knowledge
of the domain and a context model to capture the
information about the disabled user, platform and
environment.
Ontologies support semantic mapping
construction by providing explicitly defined
meaning of the information to be exchanged
(Arnarsdottir, 2006
).
Ontologies express
conceptualizations (concepts, relations, and
constraints) which are specific for a particular
domain.
As figure 2 shows, we transform the information
of the context model to an ontology model. The
provided ontology specifies the knowledge about all
accessibility requirements for all types of
disabilities. This ontology is used as transformation
conditions in our approach.
Figure 2: Creation of the ontology model.
After specifying the mappings between context’s
elements and ontology’s elements, we integrate this
correspondence within the User Interface Model.
As presented in (Happel, 2006) and (Paulheim,
2010), ontologies
may be used at different points of
time in the development process of user interfaces
like:
Design time: while developing the system. The
ontologies typically are not a part of the user
interface which is developed, and they are used
to assist the developer.
Runtime: when the system is executed. In this
case, the ontologies most often become a part of
the user interface and full a certain function in
that user interface.
In our case, the process of adaptation must be
performed at runtime. In fact, when a disabled user
is requesting any application running into a giving
device, the modeling of context model must be done
at runtime. For that reason, it must be located in a
local storage base as it will be transformed to an
ontology model which will be used by the adaptation
process.
4.2 Adaptation Process
Adaptation process is generally applied to a
previously created user interface. However, in the
case of adaptive systems for ubiquitous
environments, the adaptation process is not based
only on an existing user interface but also on an
abstract description of the structure and an
organization of the final adapted user interface
elements. These elements are specified by the
accessibility requirements captured from new
context (Brossard, 2011).
Based on these results, we propose an adaptation
process having as input (see figure 3):
1. Accessibility context event which triggers the
process
2. Application interface model which is the
subject of the personalisation and the modelling
3. Adaptation rules which represent the guidelines
of adaptation to be applied.
The adaptation process has only one output which is
the adapted interface model.
Figure 3: Input and output of the adaptation process.
To detail our adaptation process, we define in
figure 4 the activity diagram specifying its different
activities. The process is released when there are
context’s changing. At this moment, the time must
be saved. In fact, at the arrival of the new context, an
adaptation entity will be invoked in order to start the
process at runtime. The context event triggers the
process of adaptation by sending a request for rules
to be applied to the actual situation given by the
context and the interface model. Rules are divided
into four subcategories according to the interface
ICEIS2014-16thInternationalConferenceonEnterpriseInformationSystems
124
elements namely modality, navigation, interaction,
and presentation. Once the best rule is selected, an
action of transformation will be performed.
As we follow the MDA principals in our
adaptation approach, the adaptation process
represents a transformation from an abstract
interface model to another one which is tailored to
the actual context. In fact, it includes the
customization of interface design elements (such as
Input/output fields, screen resolution, screen size,
and so on) based on the context. This personalization
is in reality the transformation from one element to
another which determines different modalities
customized to the user context.
Figure 4: Adaptation process activity diagram.
4.3 Generating Final Adapted UI
Generating the final user interfaces in our model
driven approach is an automatic process. The
automation is necessary as the generation of the
adapted should be in real time with the request of
changing contexts.
4.4 Transformations
Transformation is a central concept in MDA to
address how to convert one model into another
model of the same application, and further into
executable code (Arnarsdóttir, 2006).
In our approach, we invoke transformations at
different levels (see figure 5):
- At adaptation process level: at this level, we
define a PIM to PIM transformation. The PIM
source represents the given application UI model
and the PIM target models the adapted UI model.
- At generation process level of final user
interface: on the adapted UI models, we apply,
successively, a series of model transformations
to provide automatically the final adapted user
interface. These transformations are establisehed
betwen the adapted UI PIM and PSM specific to
the application platform and between this PSM
and the Code reprsenting the the final adapted
user interface.
Transformation enriches the models with the
necessary and sufficient technical information
needed. We have illustrated in figure 5 how we
proceed with the different transformations of MDA
paradigm from adaptation process.
Figure 5: MDA Transformation in our approach.
In fact, the global approach could be summarized
by a series of model transformations from initial
platform to target platforms. Therefore, the
originality of our generic approach is that it may
provide different platform specific UI adapted
models from one initial non adapted model.
5 CONCLUSION AND FUTURE
WORK
In this paper, we have proposed a generic model
driven approach for adapting application‘s user
interface to the context change specially the context
of disabled people. This approach proposes different
transformations at different levels to generate
adapted user interface. This interface is executed in a
target plateform tailored to a given disabled user. In
this approach, we consider accessibility
requirements at runtime and at early design stages.
ContextEntering
StartAdaptation
ApplyRule
SelectRule
GenerateAction
SendTransformation
AnalyzeContextParameter
Error
SendRequestRule
Ok
ChooseRulenteraction
ChooseRuleN
ChooseRuleP
Interac tion
Navigation
Presentation
ChooseRuleP
Modality
Filter
Correct
Fault
InvokeAdaptationEntity
[ContextParameter]
[Time]
[Adaptation Rule]
AMDA-basedApproachforEnablingAccessibilityAdaptationofUserInterfaceforDisabledPeople
125
As further work, we will define a generic
accessibility context model and specify an ontology
domain which will be matched to the context model.
REFERENCES
Abascal, J., Aizpurua, A., Cearreta, I., Gamecho, B.,
Garay, N., & Miñón, R., 2011. A modular approach to
user interface adaptation for people with disabilities in
ubiquitous environments. In Internal Technical Report
No. EHU-KAT-IK-01-2011.
Akoumianakis, D., Savidis, A., and Stephanidis, C., 2000.
“Encapsulating Intelligent Interactive Behaviour in
Unified User Interface Artefacts”, Interacting With
Computers, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 383-408.
Andronico, P., Buzzi, M., Carlos Castillo, C., Leporini,B.,
(2006), “Improving search engine interfaces for blind
users: a case study”, Universal Access in the
Information Society, Volume 5, Issue 1, pp 23-40.
Arnarsdóttir, K., Berre, A.-J. , Hahn, A., Missikoff, M.,
Taglino, F., (2006), “Semantic mapping: ontology-
based vs. model-based Approach Alternative or
complementary approaches?”, EMOI - INTEROP'06.
Arrue, M., Vigo, M., Aizpurua, A., Abascal,J.,(2007),
“Accessibility Guidelines Management
Framework“,Universal Access in Human-Computer
Interaction. Applications and Services, Volume 4556,
pp 3-10.
Bacha,F., Oliveira,K., Abed, M., (2011), “A Model Driven
Architecture Approach for User Interface Generation
Focused on Content Personalization”, Proceedings of
the Fifth IEEE International Conference on Research
Challenges in Information Science, RCIS 2011
(Gosier, Guadeloupe, France, 19-21 May, 2011),
IEEE, pp. 1-6, mai .
Bongartz, S., Jin, Y., Paternò, F., Rett, J., Santoro, C.,
Spano, L. D., (2012), Adaptive User Interfaces for
Smart Environments with the Support of Model-based
Language Sara AMI’12 International Joint Conference
on Ambient Intelligence, November 2012, Pisa,
Lecture Notes in Computer Science 7683 pp.33-48,
Springer.
Bouchelliga, W., Mahfoudi, A., Benammar, L., Rebai, S.,
Abed, M., (2010), An MDE Approach for User
Interface Adaptation to the Context of Use. In
Bernhaupt R. and al. (eds.) Pro-ceedings of the 3rd
international conference on Human-centred software
engineering, Springer, 62–78.
Brossard, A., Abed, M., Kolski, C., (2011), “Taking
context into account in conceptual models using a
Model Driven Engineering approach”, Information &
Software Technology 53(12): 1349-1369.
Calvary, G, Coutaz, J, Thevenin, D, Limbourg, Q,
Souchon, N, Bouillon, L., Florins, M., and
Vanderdonckt, J., (2002), “Plasticity of User
Interfaces: A Revised Reference Framework”,
Proceedings of the first international workshop on
Task Models and Diagrams for User Interface Design,
pp 127–134.
Demeure A., Calvary G., Coutaz J., Vanderdonckt
J.,(2006), “The Comet Inspector: Manipulating
Multiple User Interface Representations
Simultaneously”, Proc. of 6th Int. Conf. on Computer-
Aided Design of User Interfaces CADUI’2006
(Bucharest, 6-8 June 2006), Chapter 13, Springer-
Verlag, Berlin, p. 167-174.
Dey A. K., Salber D., Abowd G. D., (2001), “A
conceptual framework and a toolkit for supporting the
rapid prototyping of context-aware applications”,
Human-Computer Interaction Journal, pp. 97–166.
Gajos, K. Z., Weld, D. S., Wobbrock, J.O., (2010),
“Automatically generating personalized user interfaces
with Supple”. J. Artificial Intelligence 174(12-13),
910–950.
Garrido, A., Firmenich, S., Rossi, G., Grigera, J., Medina-
Medina, N., Harari, I., (2013), “Personalized Web
Accessibility using Client-Side Refactoring”, Internet
Computing, IEEE, Volume: 17, Issue: 4, pp 58 – 66.
Hachani, S., Chessa, S., Front, A., (2009), “Une approche
générique pour l'adaptation dynamique des IHM au
contexte”, Proceedings of the 21st International
Conference on Association Francophone d'Interaction
Homme-Machine, (Grenoble, 2009), 89-96.
Happel, H.-J., & Seedorf, S, (2006), “Applications of
Ontologies in Software Engineering”, In Workshop on
Semantic Web Enabled Software Engineering
(SWESE) on the 5th International Semantic Web
Conference (ISWC 2006), Athens, Georgia, November
5-9.
Henry, S.H, 2012. ‘Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
(WCAG) Overview’, http://www.w3.org/WAI.
ISO, (2012), ISO/IEC DIS 40500 Information technology,
W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG)
2.0 (TC/SC: JTC 1).
ISO, ISO 9241-171, (2008), Ergonomics of human-system
interaction, Part 171: Guidance on software
accessibility.
Knutov, E., De Bra P., Pechenizkiy M., (2009), “AH 12
years later: a comprehensive survey of adaptive
hypermedia methods and techniques”, New Review of
Hypermedia and Multimedia. vol. 15. no. 1, pp. 5-38.
Kostadinov, D., (2008), “Personnalisation de
l’information: une approche de gestion de profilset de
reformulation de requêtes”, PhD Thesis, University of
Versailles Saint-Quentin –en-Yvelines.
Leonidis, A., Antona, M., Stephanidis, C., 2011. “Rapid
Prototyping of Adaptable User Interfaces”,
International Journal of Human-Computer
Interaction.
Lopez, J. V., Montero, F., Fermandez, C. A., Lozano, M.,
2003. “Towards Adaptive User Interface Generation:
One Step Closer to People”, In Proceedings of ICEIS
(3), pp.97-103.
Manca, M., Paternò, F., Santoro, C., 2013, “Adaptive
Mobile Multimodal User Interfaces for Dynamic
Accessibility”, Workshop on Mobile Accessibility,
CHI.
Miñón, R., Abascal, J., Aizpurua, A., Cearreta, I.,
ICEIS2014-16thInternationalConferenceonEnterpriseInformationSystems
126
Gamecho, B., Garay, N., (2011), “Model-Based
Accessible User Interface Generation in Ubiquitous
Environments”, INTERACT (4), pp: 572-575.
Miñón, R., Moreno, L., Abascal, J., (2013b), “A graphical
tool to create user interface models for ubiquitous
interaction satisfying accessibility requirements”,
Universal Access in the Information Society,
November 2013, Volume 12, Issue 4, pp 427-439.
Miñón,R., Moreno,L., Martínez, P., Abascal, J., (2013a),
“An approach to the integration of accessibility
requirements into a user interface development
method”, Journal Science of Computer Programming.
Mori, G., Paternò, F., Santoro, C., (2004), “Design and
Development of Multidevice User Interfaces through
Multiple Logical Descriptions”, IEEE Transactions on
Software Engineering. Vol. 30, N° 8, August 2004, pp.
507-520.
Oliveira, K., Bacha, F., Mnasser, H., Abed, M., (2013),
“Transportation Ontology Definition and Application
for the Content Personalization of User Interfaces”,
Expert System with Applications, 40 (8), pp. 3145-
3159.
OMG(Object Management Group, (2001), “Model Driven
Architecture (MDA)”, document number ormsc/2001-
07-01.
OMG, (2012), “Model Driven Architecture”,
http://www.omg.org/mda/- last consultation August.
Paulheim, H., Probst, F., (2010), “Ontology-Enhanced
User Interfaces: A Survey”, the International Journal
on Semantic Web and Information Systems (IJSWIS),
6(2).
Peißner, M., Doris Janssen, D., Sellner, T., (2012), “MyUI
Individualization Patterns for Accessible and Adaptive
User Interfaces”, in SMART 2012: The First
International Conference on Smart Systems, Devices
and Technologies.
Rhee, S.K., Lee, K., Kim, H., 2012, “Ontology-based
Context and Preference Model for Personal Service
Robot”, 9th International Conference on Ubiquitous
Robots and Ambient Intelligence (URAI).
SNCFT, 2013, http://www.sncft.com.tn/.
Sottet, J.S., Calvary, G., Favre, J.M.: Mapping Model: A
First Step to Ensure Usability for sustaining User
Interface Plasticity. In: Proceedings of the Workshop
on Model Driven Development of Advanced User
Interfaces (2006).
Stephanidis, C., and Savidis, A., 2001, “Universal Access
in the Information Society: Methods, Tools, and
InteractionTechnologies”, UAIS, 1: 40–55.
Stephanidis, C., Paramythis, A., Sfyrakis, M., Stergiou,
A., Maou, N., Leventis, A., Paparoulis, G.,
Karagiannidis, C., 1998. “Adaptable and Adaptive
User Interfaces for Disabled Users in the Avanti
Project”, 5th International Conference on Intelligence
in Services and Networks: Technology for Ubiquitous
Telecom Services, pp 153-166.
Thevenin D., Coutaz J., (1999), “Plasticity of User
Interfaces: Framework and Research Agenda”, Proc.
of 7th IFIP Int. Conference on HCI Interact'99, p.
110-117.
Tim, C., Kris, L., Karin, C., (2004), “Dynamo-aid: A
design process and a runtime architecture for dynamic
model-based user interface development”, In Rémi B.,
Philippe P. and Jörg R. editors, EHCI/DSV-IS 2004,
Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 3425, Springer,
2004, 77–95.
Vale, S., Hammoudi, S.: (2008), “Context-aware Model
Driven Development by Parameterized
Transformation”, In: Proceedings of MDISIS.
Vanderdonckt, J., (2005), “A MDA-Compliant
Environment for Developing User Interfaces of
Information Systems”, In: Pastor, Ó. Falcão e Cunha,
J. (eds.) CAiSE 2005. LNCS, vol. 3520, pp. 16–31.
Springer, Heidelberg.
AMDA-basedApproachforEnablingAccessibilityAdaptationofUserInterfaceforDisabledPeople
127