The Integrated Accessible Library: A Model of Service Development for the 21st Century – The Final Report of the REVIEL (Resources for Visually Impaired Users of the Electronic Library) Project

Citation

Shaw, J. (2000), "The Integrated Accessible Library: A Model of Service Development for the 21st Century – The Final Report of the REVIEL (Resources for Visually Impaired Users of the Electronic Library) Project", New Library World, Vol. 101 No. 5, pp. 243-247. https://doi.org/10.1108/nlw.2000.101.5.243.5

The REVIEL Project was sponsored by the British Library and JISC and aimed to look at the current situation with regard to accessible library services for blind and visually impaired people. This report is both a detailed representation of its findings and a delineation of its recommendations – the core recommendation being the setting‐up of NALS, a UK National Accessible Library Service.

The report opens with a preface, detailed contents page and an executive summary (which incidentally provides a useful overview of the document’s content and purpose). The main body of the report is then split into four sections and these are followed by a Select Bibliography, a welcome list of acronyms (be warned – some sections abound with acronyms!) and an Appendix entitled “20 golden rules for Web page design” – invaluable guidelines on accessibility for all Web page designers and maintainers.

The appearance of the report, its layout and choice of font, coupled with the absence of an index and dearth of images, may seem strange but this should almost certainly be explained in terms of ensuring its accessibility to partially sighted and blind people. No double standards here!

Part 1 of the report outlines the proposal for NALS – essentially a hybrid service using both electronic and traditional formats as appropriate to the needs of its users. The proposed model would include a national co‐ordinating agency, a resource databank hub, a technical advisory centre and a series of clusters of delivery agencies.

Part 2 provides background on the REVIEL project and looks at a broad range of issues relating to visual impairment and the current accessibility of library services. As a non‐specialist, I probably found this the most interesting section of the report for it contains an introduction to the different types of visual impairment including the staggering statistic that one million people in the UK are eligible to be registered blind or partially sighted. There are also descriptions of traditional accessible formats, e.g. Braille, Moon, tactile, large print, etc. as well as a critical appraisal of the problems of access associated with electronic sources and particularly WWW documents. Part 2 concludes with an overview of current legislation (including the Disability Discrimination Act 1995), a look at relevant research and development initiatives and a discussion of current Government policy.

Part 3 of the report is particularly concerned with users’ needs and issues of accessibility within a generic framework. This section is at times difficult to follow probably because of the technical nature of much of the discussion: at times I found myself so involved with grasping individual concepts that I almost forgot the overall context of accessibility – a classic case of failing to see the wood for the trees!Those who never flinch at phrases such as “Dublin core”, “Z39.50” and “Semantic interoperability” will hopefully encounter no such confusion!

Finally, Part 4 deals with implementation issues including a proposed business model for NALS and a set of recommendations for further work. I was somewhat disappointed with the relatively limited attention given to the funding of NALS. While recognizing that there is a limit as to what can be said at this initial theoretical stage, I was surprised by the suggestion that academic, public and other sectors merely need to be willing to recognize the cost implications of accessibility. The report seems to suggest that once these are recognized then the various sectors, supported by the national framework, will be able to successfully improve local service points in line with this report’s recommendations. While the idea that “where there is a will there is a way” is attractive, speaking from my own experience within an academic setting, willingness without adequate funding usually fails to deliver the goods!

Notwithstanding any of my own minor criticisms, I would highly recommend the purchase of this report. It is competitively priced for such an in‐depth piece of research and the issues raised demand wide and timely attention by all involved with library service provision.