Voteinfo

Getestete Version: 1.9.0

The Voteinfo app provides all official information on voting and elections in Switzerland at federal, cantonal and municipal level. The results of the votes and elections are continuously updated and statistically compiled.

Overall assessment of the app Voteinfo

Overall assessment: Conditional accessibility.

Full name:Voteinfo
Publisher:Schweizerische Bundeskanzlei
Publisher country:CH
Informationen about the app
Tested version:1.9.0
Operating system:iOS
Overall assessment normalised:0.78
– Share of accessibility profile:0.4 (50% out of 0.8)
– Share of feasibility grade:0.38 (50% out of 0.75)
Valuation information
The assessments and ratings relate exclusively to the version 1.9.0 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 operability4.5 out of 5 points
Voice control5 out of 5 points
Compatibility with user agents3 out of 5 points
Assistance with interactions5 out of 5 points
Consistency/predictability5 out of 5 points
Semantic structure3 out of 5 points
Comprehensibility3.5 out of 5 points
Display flexibility4 out of 5 points
Contrast and sensory characteristics4 out of 5 points
Non-text content graphics3.5 out of 5 points
Multimedia alternatives5
Average value4 out of 5 points
The maximum achievable score is 5 points.
  • 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 skills75%
Sight79%
Hearing100%
Cognition95%

Feasibility of use scenarios

Grade
4.5
The highest grade is 6.

Key findings

The app settings can be accessed with both a screen reader and a keyboard. The app’s content is hardly structured when it comes to information and voting text items or results: the headings are not effective in terms of semantics; tables have no column titles. Switches are sometimes not lablelled, or only in English, and the shortcuts are not always correct. In addition, various items of text are embedded exclusively as graphics without being sufficiently explained in the surrounding text. Text content regarding voting is difficult to navigate by keyboard because it is not in logical reading order. Information videos are subtitled and thus meet the requirements for accessibility. When using the search feature, screen reader users are not informed of status messages and, as such, do not know whether or not results are being displayed. In the archive, the roles of the individual elements (e.g. ‘Zurich’) are only indicated after activation. The text size is not continuously adjustable. In some parts of the app, the contrast ratios are not sufficient.

Navigate to the next or previous results


Direct links to all detailed results