ePost App

Getestete Version: 1.19.0

The ePost app allows you to manage conventional mail digitally. In addition to receiving letters digitally on your smartphone, bills can be paid directly in the app and letter mail can be scanned and stored in a central archive.

Overall assessment of the app ePost App

Overall assessment: Insufficient accessibility.

Full name:ePost App
Publisher:KLARA Business AG
Publisher country:CH
Informationen about the app
Tested version:1.19.0
Operating system:iOS
Overall assessment normalised:0.65
– Share of accessibility profile:0.34 (50% out of 0.68)
– Share of feasibility grade:0.31 (50% out of 0.62)
Valuation information
The assessments and ratings relate exclusively to the version 1.19.0 of the app tested by us in the period from June to August 2023.

Accessibility profile

Tabelle Aspekte des Accessibility-Profil

AspectRating
Mobile operability2.5 out of 5 points
Keyboard operability3 out of 5 points
Voice control5 out of 5 points
Compatibility with user agents1 out of 5 points
Assistance with interactions3.5 out of 5 points
Consistency/predictability5 out of 5 points
Semantic structure3.5 out of 5 points
Comprehensibility4 out of 5 points
Display flexibility1.5 out of 5 points
Contrast and sensory characteristics4.5 out of 5 points
Non-text content graphics4.5 out of 5 points
Multimedia alternativesNo rating
Average value3.5 out of 5 points
The maximum achievable score is 5 points.

On a normalised scale, the score of the accessibility profile corresponds to 0.68 points. This value is weighted at 50% in the overall assessment.

  • Mobile operability: Usability and full display of content in portrait and landscape format; pointing actions and operability by device movement possible with conventional input methods.
  • Keyboard operability: Interactive elements can only be operated with a keyboard and are highlighted when focused on.
  • Voice control: Controls have an accessible label that corresponds exactly to the visual description/name.
  • Compatibility with user agents: User agents and assistive technologies are informed about changes in the state of the user interface as well as status messages.
  • Assistance with interactions: Interaction with forms; pointer entries can be cancelled or undone.
  • Consistency/predictability: Consistent navigation; context remains when focused in or during input.
  • Semantic structure: Content is labelled with structural elements such as headings, lists and labels that reflect the context of meaning.
  • Comprehensibility: Headings, form labels and link texts are understandable, correct language declaration is used.
  • Display flexibility: The presentation of the content can be adapted to the needs of the users: text size, control over animated elements and media.
  • Contrast and sensory characteristics: Adequate contrasts, no expressions such as ‘in the picture on the right’ or ‘click the red button’; information is not conveyed solely by colour.
  • Non-text content (graphics): Informative graphic elements have useful alternative texts.
  • Multimedia alternatives Multimedia content is compatible with at least one alternative sensory channel.
Value rangeMeaning
4.5 to 5 pointsGood accessibility
4 pointsConditional accessibility
3 to 3.5 pointsInsufficient accessibility
0 to 2.5 pointsPoor accessibility

Diagramm Aspekte Accessibility-Profil

Presentation of accessibility by type of limitation

Type of restrictionDegree of compliance
Motor skills54%
Sight71%
Hearing100%
Cognition80%

Feasibility of use scenarios

Grade
3.8
The highest grade is 6.

On a normalised scale, the grade corresponds to 0.62 points. This value is weighted at 50% in the overall assessment.

Key findings

Electronically received letters can be read, stored and deleted with the screen reader too. However, feedback on the success of the action carried out would be helpful. Such feedback is also lacking when scanning documents. As a result, this feature, which is useful for blind people, cannot be used with the screen reader. The labels are not implemented insufficiently: some of these are not labelled, only in English and/or not properly linked. In some places there is also a lack of meaningful alternative texts (e.g. when it comes to the informative graphics for the back arrow or when saving). Headings are marked as such only visually, which makes it very difficult to navigate with a screen reader. The timeout interval is not adjustable: accordingly, users are logged out of the app without being given the opportunity to take action.

Navigate to the next or previous results

Direct links to all detailed results