EVALUATION ON WEB ACCESSIBILITY, POPULARITY AND VISIBILITY IN INDONESIAN E-GOVERNMENT
International Conference on Internet Studies, August 16-17, 2014, Singapore
EVALUATION ON WEB ACCESSIBILITY, POPULARITY
AND VISIBILITY IN INDONESIAN E-GOVERNMENT
1 Hanum Putri Permatasari
2 Dessy Wulandari Asfary Putri
3 Abdus Syakur
4 Anacostia Kowanda 1, 2, 3, 4
Gunadarma University, Indonesia
1, 2, 3, 4
{hanum, dessy_wap, syakur, anacos}@staff.gunadarma.ac.id
ABSTRACT
Today, web accessibility, popularity and visibility are becoming important in many countries, especially for government that trust on the web for serving full of information easily reached by their citizens, then called e-government. This study is to evaluate the web accessibility on ministry and state supreme agency websites in Indonesia based on conformance level of WCAG 2.0 by W3C. Furthermore, this study used an approach for measuring data traffic analysis web as popularity using Alexa and Majestic SEO to examine visibility of the web. Data analysis with statistical test using ANOVA. The study concluded that web accessibility on state supreme agency websites in Indonesia lower than ministry websites. Through the result, both popularity and visibility on ministry websites gained higher rank than state supreme agency websites. Ministry and state supreme agency websites in Indonesia still requires improvement of accessibility, popularity, and visibility.
Keyword: web accessibility, web popularity, web visibility, e-government, indonesia
1. INTRODUCTION As the rapid growth of the web, there is a need for examining of the web accessibility.
Tim Berners-Lee, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) director and inventor of the World Wide Web stated that the power of the web is in its universality. Access by everyone regardless of disability is an essential aspect. Based reference [9] act of the republic of Indonesia number 14 of 2008 on Public Information Openness stated that is an instrument in optimizing public control towards the governance of state and other public bodies and matters affecting public interest. The law consists of 64 articles which is in essence giving liability to any public agency for open access to public information for each applicant to obtain public information, except for some specific informations. One measurement of the successful in Information and Communication Technology on government sector is [13] the E-Government Development Index (EGDI) that periodically published by the United Nations. EGDI uses the most important dimensions of e-government, namely: scope and quality of online services, development status of telecommunication infrastructure, and inherent human capital. First, to arrive at a set of online service index values, the researchers assessed each country’s national website, including the national central portal, e-services portal and e-participation portal, as well as the websites of the related ministries of education, labour, social services, health, finance, and environment as applicable. In addition to being assessed for content and features, the national sites were tested for a minimal level of web content accessibility as described in the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). Second, the telecommunication infrastructure index is an arithmetic average composite of five indicators: estimated internet users per 100 inhabitants, number of main fixed telephone lines per 100 inhabitants, number of mobile subscribers per 100 inhabitants, number of fixed internet subscriptions per 100 inhabitants, and number of fixed broadband facilities per 100 inhabitants. The International Telecommunication Union is the primary source of data in each case. Third, the human capital index is a weighted average composite of two indicators: adult literacy rate and the combined primary, secondary, and tertiary gross enrolment ratio, with two thirds weights assigned to adult literacy rate and one third weight assigned to the gross enrolment ratio. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization is the main source of data for both indicators. All data gaps were filled either using data from the 2010 UNDP Human Development Report or using proxy indicators from other authoritative sources such as official UNICEF figures from its public report or World Bank figures on its website. According to the 2012 United Nations
th
E-government Survey Rankings which was released on 29 February 2012, the Republic of Korea is the world leader (0.9283) followed by the Netherlands (0.9125), the United Kingdom (0.8960) and Denmark (0.8889), with the United States, Canada, France, Norway, Singapore and Sweden close behind. Indonesia gained in the world rankings from 109 to 97 out of 193 countries in 2012. Fig. 1 presents e-government development in countries with populations larger than 100 million.
Figure 1.
Government Development in Largest Population Countries
2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
2.1 Web Accessibility
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) determines 19 countries have their own legislations or policies about web accessibility. Unfortunately, it has not been implemented yet in Indonesia especially by the governments. Today, web accessibility is becoming important in many countries, especially for government that trust on the web for serving full of information easily reached by their citizens. Many governments especially ministry websites in Indonesia are poorly designed and have accessibility obstacles that prevent people with disabilities from using them. W3C has provided guidelines for web accessibility under the name of Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI), and this initiative has launched the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 1.0 and WCAG 2.0). How WCAG 2.0 is different from WCAG 1.0, based W3C [19], WCAG 2.0 applies more broadly to different types of web technologies and to more advanced technologies. It is designed to apply as technologies develop in the future. The WCAG 2.0 requirements are more precisely testable with automated testing and human evaluation. This allows WCAG 2.0 to be more easily used where specific requirements and conformance testing are necessary, such as in design specifications, purchasing, regulation, and contractual agreements. Thus, this study has examined the web accessibility on ministry and state supreme agency websites in Indonesia. Besides accessibility, web visibility also plays important roles especially in universities. In particular, web visibility of university is very significant in order to improve their university rankings. Such Webometrics accounted 50% for visibility indicator. This study also to examine the correlation between accessibility, popularity, and visibility indicator on ministry and state supreme agency websites in Indonesia.
2.2 Related Research
Research on website accessibility had been done by some countries. The study [2] on Dubai e-Government sites did not meet the minimum W3C accessibility conformance level. Evaluation of Saudi Arabia government Web sites [5] based on the Web Accessibility (WCAG level) had made many of the accessibility mistakes as predicted. Another research had been done by [6] to evaluate Indian websites (government, educational and commercial) that clearly showed the compliance of the web portals with respect to the WCAG 2.0 guidelines. Eun-Ju Park et al. [4] proposed HTML5 as a web standard to improve web accessibility in Korea. The findings showed that Korea has built fewer HTML5 web sites than foreign countries. The research on web accessibility of SNSs (Facebook, Twitter, Me2day, and Yozm) [12] contributed to both theory and practice (implemented to disabled individuals). Ramiro Goncalves et al. [10] examined the web accessibility of the Forbes 250 largest enterprises based WCAG level and using the Business Narrative Modelling Language.
Table 1. Related Research on Web Accessibility
Researcher Area of Samples Methodology
AccessibilityEun-Ju Park Websites in The top 100 K-WAH4.0 et al. (2014) Korea & abroad most visited websites
M. R. Patra Indian websites
15 Indian AChecker et al. (2014) websites Sang M. Lee Four SNSs: Eight disabled NSTG-IWA et al. (2013) Facebook, individuals
Twitter, Me2day based type of & Yozm disability
B. Al Dubai
21 Dubai TAW and Mourad & F. e-Government e-Government EvalAccess2.0 Kamoun sites (2013) Ramiro Enterprises in 250 largest Sortsite Goncalves et Forbes enterprises of al. (2013) the year 2009 according to the Forbes ‘The Global 2000’
H. S. e-Government in 36 government Manual Al-Khalifa Saudi Arabia websites from evaluation (2012) different sectors
2.3 Indonesian Ministry
Ministry (official name: Ministry of State) is the Indonesian government agency in charge of certain affairs in the government. Ministry based in Jakarta, the country's capital and is under and responsible to the president. Every ministry in charge of certain affairs in the government. Under Presidential Decree number 47 in 2009 [8], these ministries are categorized and presented in the table 2 as follows: (1) Ministry which handles government affairs that ministry
’s nomenclature explicitly mentioned in the Constitution of 1945; (2) Ministry which handles government affairs scope mentioned in 1945; (3) Ministry which handles government affairs in order sharpening, coordination, and synchronization of the government program; (4) in addition besides ministry that handle government affairs of above, there is also Coordinating Ministry is in charge of the ministries in terms of synchronization and coordination of affairs of the ministries that are within the scope of duties; (5) Ministerial Institute; and (6) State Supreme Agencies.
Table 2. The Classification of Indonesian Government No. Category (1) No. Category (3)
1 Ministry of Home Affairs
1 Ministry of National Development Planning
2 Ministry of Foreign Affairs
2 State Minister for Research and Technology
3 Ministry of Defense State Minister for Cooperatives Small and
3
Medium Enterprises No. Category (2)4 State Minister for State Owned Enterprise Ministry of Justice and State Minister for Acceleration Development
1
5
Human Right Backward Regions Ministry of Communication6 State Minister for Environment
2 and Informatics State Minister for The Empowerment of State
7
3 Ministry of Finance Apparaturs and Bureaucracy Reform
4 Ministry of Trade
8 State Minister for Public Housing
5 Ministry of Industry State Minister for Women Empowerment and
9
6 Ministry of Transportation Child Protection
7 Ministry of Public Work
10 State Minister for Youth and Sports Affairs Ministry of Manpower and
11 Ministry of the State Secretariat
8 Transmigration
9 Ministry of Agriculture
10 Ministry of Forestry No. Category (4)
Ministry of Maritime and Coordinating Ministry for Political,
11
1
Fisheries Affairs Legal and Security Affairs Ministry of Energy And Coordinating Ministry for Economic12
2
Mineral Resources Affairs13 Ministry of Health Coordinating Ministry for People's
3
Ministry of Education and Welfare14 Culture
15 Ministry of Social Services
16 Ministry of Religious Affairs No. Category (5)
Ministry of Tourism and
17
1 Cabinet Secretariat Creative Economics
2 Attorney General
1 People's Consultative Assembly
2 The Indonesian House of Representative
3 The Regional Representative Council
4 Constitutional Court
5 Supreme Court
6 The Audit Board of RI
7 President
8 Vice President
3. METHODOLOGY
The study was conducted with the main focus on evaluation of accessibility, popularity and visibility on ministry and state supreme agency websites in Indonesia. For the first classification, this study selected 36 ministries that consisting of 5 categories and 8 state supreme agency websites in Indonesia. Second classification with detail comparison of variable research and the result of ANOVA test are based on coordinating ministry consisting three groups and 8 state supreme agency websites in Indonesia. Evaluation of the first phase was to make sure those websites run well. Next, validate the web using the W3C online validator [17]. Evaluation of web accessibility using WCAG 2.0. Automatic evaluation software tool [18] that was used in this study for validating WCAG 2.0, such as aChecker [14], recommended by W3C. The official ministry and state supreme agency websites were evaluated for WCAG 2.0 conformance Level A, AA and AAA. This study used an approach for data traffic analysis web using Alexa [1], include global rank, id rank and reputation link. Majestic SEO [7] was used for offering special function that search for matches only in web elements such as referring domain, external backlinks, citation flow and trust flow. Data collection and measurement were conducted on May 18-20 2014.
4. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
The object of this study consisted of 36 ministries that was classified first into 5 categories (as mentioned in literature) and 8 state supreme agency websites in Indonesia. Validating a website is important to check for valid links in order to interpret well on search engines and also users. So, the first step was to validate the web using the W3C online validator. Fig. 2 shows the average number of parsing errors in ministry and state institution websites. The most common mistakes of parsing error from W3C validator were missing attribute for element html or false in writing HTML script, incorrect nesting of elements, without using alternative name of image or form. XHTML 1.0 transitional was document type that mostly used by ministry and state supreme agency websites. XHTML 1.0 is older than HTML5. Few websites used
Figure 2. Average Number of Parsing Errors
After validating the websites using W3C validator, each website was manually checked against the WCAG 2.0 success criteria by using previously aChecker, automatic evaluation software tool that was used in this study for validating WCAG
2.0. WCAG 2.0 has three levels of conformance are defined: A (lowest), AA, and AAA (highest). Conformance Level: one of the following levels of conformance is met in full [20].
Level A: For Level A conformance (the minimum level of conformance),
the web page satisfies all the Level A Success Criteria, or a conforming alternate version is provided.
Level AA: For Level AA conformance, the web page satisfies all the Level
A and Level AA Success Criteria, or a Level AA conforming alternate version is provided.
Level AAA: For Level AAA conformance, the web page satisfies all the
Level A, Level AA and Level AAA Success Criteria, or a Level AAA conforming alternate version is provided.
Figure 3 shows the average failed of success criteria of ministry and state supreme agency websites in level A, AA and AAA conformance. State supreme agency websites were the highest in failing Level A, AA and AAA conformance. Further inspecting the failed success criteria, it was found that the most failed success criteria include: SC 1.1.1 (Non-text Content), SC 1.3.1 (Info and Relationships), SC 1.4.3 (Contrast), SC 2.1.1 (Keyboard), SC 2.2.2 (Pause, Stop, Hide), SC 2.4.2 (Page Titled), SC 2.4.4 (Link Purpose (In Context)), SC 2.4.6 (Headings and Labels), SC 3.1.1 (Language of Page), SC 3.3.2 (Labels or Instructions) and SC 4.1.1 (Parsing).
There were several ministries in level A (5 ministries), AA (8 ministries), AAA (5 ministries) conformance that passed or no known problems detected. Five ministries Transportation, The Ministry of Manpower and Transmigration, The Ministry of Tourism and Creative Economics then The Ministry of Development of Disadvantaged Regions. The state supreme agency website which had least known problems in all level conformance was The People's Consultative Assembly of the Republic of Indonesia.
Figure 3. Average Failed of Success Criteria
Alexa traffic ranking is a website indexing engine that attempts to measure popularity of websites. The lower the Alexa ranking, the more popular of website is viewed. In Table 3 we could see that the average of Majestic SEO and Alexa Rank in Ministries and State Institution. The highest rank elements in Alexa were achieved by ministry on category number one (1) for global rank; rank followed by country was on category number two (2); and number of reputation link was on category number two (2). The following are explanation about the rank elements in Alexa:
- Global , an estimate of website's popularity. The rank is calculated using a
combination of average daily visitors to a website and pageviews on a website over the past 3 months. The site with the highest combination of visitors and pageviews is ranked #1.
, an estimate of website's popularity in a specific country (Indonesia). The rank -
ID
by country is calculated using a combination of average daily visitors to a website and pageviews on a website from users from that country over the past month. The site with the highest combination of visitors and pageviews is ranked #1 in that country (Indonesia). a measure of a website’s reputation. The number of links to a
- Reputation Link,
website from sites visited by users in the Alexa traffic panel. Links that were not seen by users in the Alexa traffic panel are not counted. Multiple links from the same site are only counted once. marketing. It is used for Webometrics research to evaluate the impact indicator. The quality of the contents is evaluated through a "virtual referendum", counting all the external inlinks that the University webdomain receives from third parties. Those links are recognizing the institutional prestige, the academic performance, the value of the information, and the usefulness of the services as introduced in the webpages according to the criteria of millions of web editors from all over the world. As it is seen from the table below (Table 3), the average of Majestic SEO and Alexa Rank in ministries and state supreme agency. The highest elements of Majestic SEO were achieved by ministry on category number one (1) for referring domain; external backlinks was on category number two (2); citation flow was on category number two (2); and trust flow was on category number three (3). The following are explanation about Majestic SEO elements:
- Referring Domain, also known as "ref domain", is a domain from which a backlink is pointing to a page or link.
- External Backlinks, also referred to in SEO as a external "inlink".
- Citation Flow, is a Majestic SEO Flow Metric, which is weighted by the number citations to a given URL, or Domain.
- Trust Flow, is a Majestic SEO Flow Metric, which is weighted by the number of clicks from a seed set of trusted sites to a given URL, or Domain.
Through the result, either in Alexa ranking or Majestic SEO, the ministry with category number two mostly gained the highest rank of all elements. These elements were rank by country and number of reputation link (Alexa ranking) also external backlinks and citation flow (Majestic SEO).
Table 3. Average of Majestic SEO and Alexa Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6 Majestic SEO Referring 605 514 324 200 235 368
Domain External
97,437 163,997 65,964 35,551 51,671 62,463 Backlinks
Citation
33
38
34
24
37
34 Flow Trust Flow
33
32
34
27
30
31
1
2
3
4
5
6 Global 172,146 361,059 558,262 1,011,557 242,423 529,372
Rank
ID Rank 5,042 1,638 10,749 40,720 4,268 14,797 Reputation 636 1,599 1,087 417 783 766
Link In addition besides ministry that handle government affairs of above, there is also Coordinating Ministry is in charge of the ministries in terms of synchronization and coordination of affairs of the ministries that are within the scope of duties . That Coordinating Ministry is classified into three groups: (1) Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs consisting of 6 ministries; (2) Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs consisting of 15 ministries; and (3) Coordinating Ministry for People's Welfare consisting of 9 ministries . State supreme agency into fourth group in this study consisting of 8 agencies including the website of president and vice president. Comparison of variable value in this study from the group of Coordinating Ministry and State Supreme Agency are presented in the figure 4 below.
Table 4. Group of Coordinating Ministry
No. Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs
1 Ministry of Home Affairs
2 Ministry of Foreign Affairs
3 Ministry of Defense
4 Ministry of Justice and Human Right
5 Ministry of Communication and Informatics
State Minister for The Empowerment of State Apparaturs and
6 Bureaucracy Reform No. Coordinating Ministry for People's Welfare
1 Ministry of Health
2 Ministry of Education and Culture
3 Ministry of Social Services
4 Ministry of Religious Affairs
5 Ministry of Tourism and Creative Economics
6 State Minister for Environment
7 State Minister for Women Empowerment and Child Protection
8 State Minister for Public Housing
9 Ministry of Manpower and Transmigration
State supreme agency showed the highest parsing error and parsing warning followed by Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs, Coordinating Ministry for People's Welfare, and Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs of parsing errors; and Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs, and Coordinating Ministry for People's Welfare for parsing warnings. The comparison showed that the number of backlinks from Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs has the highest then followed by Coordinating Ministry for People's Welfare, Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs then state supreme agency. Those four groups showed the number referring relatively lower than the number of referring domains. It showed that a high number of links from other sites did not provide an actual visit to the websites of ministries and state supreme agency in Indonesia. Value of referring domain that was low could reduce the number of visits to be low. These conditions could be seen from the average of traffic rank was also low, with an average national rating of 9197. Value of citation flow and trust flow for ministries and state supreme agency are also low, with a high score under 50. Referring to Majestic SEO, citation flow is defined as
15 State Minister for State Owned Enterprise
14 Ministry of National Development Planning
13 State Minister for Acceleration Development Backward Regions
12 State Minister for Cooperatives Small and Medium Enterprises
11 State Minister for Research and Technology
10 Ministry of Public Work
8 Ministry of Maritime and Fisheries Affairs
9 State Minister for Youth and Sports Affairs No. Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs
7 Ministry of Transportation
6 Ministry of Forestry
5 Ministry of Agriculture
4 Ministry of Trade
3 Ministry of Industry
2 Ministry of Energy And Mineral Resources
1 Ministry of Finance
“one of the Majestic SEO flow metrics, the which is weighted by the number of citations to a given URL, or domain” and trusts flow as “one of the Majestic SEO flow metrics, the which is weighted by the number of clicks from a seed set of trusted sites to a given URL, or domain”. The low traffic conditions was one measure of website performance as mentioned by Chander and Kush [11] which related to the traffic analysis with usability and popularity on government websites in India. Popularity of the government websites that was still low also expressed by Silfianti, Suhendra, and Suryadi [15] for local government website then Silfianti and Suhatril [16] for the provincial government website in Indonesia. The results of ANOVA analysis showed that the differences variable in this study between ministry and state supreme agency were not significantly as shown in the table 5 below.
Figure 4. Comparison of Variable Research
Table 5. The Result of ANOVA Test Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Parsing Errors Between Groups 97998.113 3 32666.038 .487 .693 Within Groups 2548346.291 38 67061.745
Total 2646344.405
41 Parsing Warnings Between Groups 62884.504 3 20961.501 .612 .611 Within Groups 1300781.782 38 34231.100 Total 1363666.286
41 Referring Domain Between Groups 472837.399 3 157612.466 1.181 .330 Within Groups 5070542.220 38 133435.322 Total 5543379.619
41 External Backlinks Between Groups 2.825E10 3 9.417E9 .587 .627 Within Groups 6.096E11 38 1.604E10 Total 6.379E11
41 Citation Flow Between Groups 259.759 3 86.586 1.231 .312 Within Groups 2673.384 38 70.352 Total 2933.143
41 Trust Flow Between Groups 272.948 3 90.983 1.008 .400 Within Groups 3430.195 38 90.268 Total 3703.143
41 Global Rank Between Groups 3.320E12 3 1.107E12 1.819 .160 Within Groups 2.313E13 38 6.086E11 Total 2.645E13
41 Reputation Link Between Groups 4861463.345 3 1620487.782 .960 .421 Within Groups 6.414E7 38 1687831.752 Total 6.900E7
41 KnownProblems Between Groups 1857.730 3 619.243 .310 .818 Within Groups 75984.175 38 1999.584 Total 77841.905
41 The results of ANOVA test generally showed that ministry and state supreme agency websites relatively have the same performance seen from the 9 parameters that improvement of accessibility, popularity, and visibility. This can be done by increasing the quantity and quality of content, diversity of service features, as well as technical aspects that related to design and web programming, as suggested also by Hermana and Silfianti [3].
5. CONCLUSION
The study concluded that web accessibility in Indonesian e-government especially on state supreme agency websites lower than ministry websites. The most common mistakes of parsing error from W3C validator were missing attribute for element HTML or false in writing HTML script, incorrect nesting of elements, without using alternative name of image or form. Many specific aspects mentioned on result and discussion section based conformance level of WCAG 2.0. There were several ministries in level A (5 ministries), AA (8 ministries), AAA (5 ministries) conformance that passed or no known problems detected. Five ministries that passed to all level conformance were the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of Transportation, the Ministry of Manpower and Transmigration, the Ministry of Tourism and Creative Economics then State Minister for Acceleration Development Backward Regions. The state supreme agency websites which had least known problems in all level conformance was the People's Consultative Assembly of the Republic of Indonesia. Through the result, both popularity and visibility on ministry websites gained higher rank than state supreme agency websites. Ministry and state supreme agency websites in Indonesia still requires improvement of accessibility, popularity, and visibility. This can be done by increasing the quantity and quality of content, diversity of service features, as well as technical aspects that related to design and web programming.
6. REFERENCES
[1] Alexa , “Traffic Statistic Web,”
[2]
B. Al Mourad and F. Kamoun, “Accessibility evaluation of dubai e-government websites: Findings and implications,” Journal of E-Government Studies and Best
Practices , pp. 1-15, 2013.
[3]
B. Hermana and W. Silfianti, “Evaluating E-government Implementation by Local
Government: Digital Divide in Internet Based Public Services in Indonesia ,” International Journal of Business and Social Science , vol. 2 no. 3, 2011.
[4] E.-J. Park, Y.-W. Lim, and H.- K. Lim, “A study of web accessibility of websites built in html5- focusing on the top 100 most visited websites,” International
Journal of Multimedia and Ubiquitous Engineering , vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 247-256, 2014.
[5] H. S. Al- Khalifa, “The accessibility of saudi arabia government web sites: an explorat ory study,” Universal Access in the Information Society, vol. 11, no. 2, pp.
201-210, 2012.
[6] M. R. Patra, A. R. Dash, and P. K. Mishra, “A quantitative analysis of wcag 2.0 com- pliance for some indian web portals.” International Journal of Computer Science, Engineering & Applications , vol. 4, no. 1, 2014.
[13] The UN E-Government Survey, “E-Government for the People,” ISBN:
[19] W3C, “How WCAG 2.0 Differs from WCAG 1.0,” 2014, http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/from10/diff.php
[18] W3C, “Complete List of Web Accessibility Evaluation Tools,” 2014, http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/tools/complete
W3C, “W3C HTML Validation Tools,” 2014,
Popular? ,” World of Computer Science and Information Technology Journal, vol. 1, no.6, p.253-259, 2011. [17]
,” Proceeding of Global Management Conference – Bali, Indonesia April-May 2010. [16] W. Silfi anti and R.J. Suhatril, “Do Indonesian Province Website Rich and
Indonesian Local Govenment Website: Analysis of Web Content, Traffic and Webmetric
[15] W. Silfianti, A. Suhendra, and H.S. Suryadi, “Performance Evaluation of
, “AChecker,” 2014
978-92-1-123190-8, 2012, http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan048065.pdf [14] Web Accessibility Checker
[12] S. M. Lee, S.-G. Hong, D.-H. An, and H.- M. Lee, “Disability users evaluation of the web accessibility of sns,” Service Business, pp. 1-24, 2013.
[7] Majestic SEO, “Backlink Checker & Site Explorer,”
International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering , vol. 2, issue 2, February 2012.
Chander and A. Kush, “E-Governance Web Portals Assessment of Two States,”
[11] S.
[10] R. Goncalves, J. Martins, J. Pereira, M. A.-Y. Oliveira, and J. J. P. Ferreira, “Enterprise web accessibility levels amongst the forbes 250: Where art thou o virtuous leader?” Journal of business ethics, vol. 113, no. 2, pp. 363-375, 2013.
Year 2008 on Public Information Openness ,” 2008, http://pppl.depkes.go.id/_asset/_regulasi/UU14th2008_ttg_KIP.pdf
[9] President of the Republic of Indonesia , “Act of the Republic of Indonesia No. 14
Formation and Organization of the Ministry of State ,” 2009,
[8] President of the Republic of Indonesia , “Presidential Decree No. 47 Year 2009 on
2014,
[20] W3C, “Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) Overiew,” 2014, http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/wcag