JP2011107981A - Web page diagnostic order determination system, web page diagnostic order determination method, and program - Google Patents

Abstract

<P>PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide a Web page diagnostic order determination system for quickly estimating the overall degree of consideration of accessibility or usability for a Web site comprising many Web pages. <P>SOLUTION: The Web page diagnostic order determination system includes: an HTML element extraction means for extracting HTML elements configuring a Web page; an HTML component identification means for identifying the components of HTML configured by the HTML elements extracted by the HTML element extraction means and a hierarchical structure including the HTML elements; a component counting means for counting the components of the HTML in a Web site; a diagnostic necessity determination means for determining whether to diagnose the components of the HTML; and a diagnostic order determination means for determining the order of diagnosis based on the number of the components of the HTML to be diagnosed. <P>COPYRIGHT: (C)2011,JPO&INPIT

Description

  The present invention relates to a web page diagnosis order determination system for efficiently performing an accessibility diagnosis when diagnosing how much consideration is given to accessibility of a target web page.

  With the spread of the Internet, various information can be obtained, and one of the methods using the Internet is browsing of web pages. The web page is composed of text, images, and the like, and displays text and images on the browser as described in the web page.

  By the way, the web page is used not only by using a browser but also by using various software and systems such as voice reading software (see, for example, Patent Document 1).

  It is required to design a web page so as to be compatible with various software and systems, that is, various browsers, that is, ensuring accessibility. In particular, public sites such as local governments are required to make the web accessible, and the number of sites that consider accessibility is increasing. It is necessary to point out an unfavorable design part from the viewpoint of accessibility, and to urge correction, and a check tool that can be automatically checked has been developed.

JP 2006-171544 A

  When checking (diagnosis) whether the conventional check tool considers accessibility, it is possible to point out a part of the design that is not preferable from the viewpoint of accessibility. Items to be diagnosed (diagnostic items) are created based on guidelines such as JIS standards and JIS X 8341-3. By using the check tool, you can find the part of the design that is not desirable and modify the design.

  However, it can be easily diagnosed by finding an unfavorable design from the usage of HTML tags, etc., but human judgment is necessary to finally diagnose whether accessibility is taken into consideration. For example, one of the good design methods is an item of attaching alternative text to an image. By attaching an alternative text to the image and using the voice reading software to read the alternative text with synthesized voice, a blind user who cannot use the image information can acquire the image information.

  At this time, it is difficult for the check tool to automatically determine whether or not the alternative text appropriately represents the information of the image, and it is necessary for humans to determine it by looking. One website is composed of a plurality of web pages, and one web page is composed of a plurality of elements such as images. A website may be composed of tens of thousands of web pages, and it is very time consuming to diagnose the accessibility of all web pages of such a large website. Whenever a change is made, there is a problem that it is cumbersome to perform an overall accessibility diagnosis.

  In a website composed of many web pages, it is very time-consuming and impractical to diagnose all the items of the guideline and determine the degree of consideration for accessibility on the website. Although it is convenient to be able to estimate the overall degree of consideration only by diagnosing some pages, there is a problem that it is difficult to determine an effective diagnosis order.

  The present invention provides a web page diagnosis order determination system capable of quickly estimating the degree of consideration of accessibility or usability for the website as a whole in a website composed of many web pages, An object of the present invention is to provide a web page diagnosis order determination method and program.

  The present invention provides an HTML element extraction means for extracting an HTML element constituting a web page, the HTML element extracted by the HTML element extraction means, and a hierarchical structure including the HTML element. HTML component identification means for identifying the components, component counting means for counting the HTML components in the website, and whether the HTML components need to be diagnosed And a diagnosis order determining means for determining the order of diagnosis based on the number of HTML components that need to be diagnosed.

  According to the present invention, in a website configured by many web pages, when the degree of consideration of accessibility or usability is estimated for the entire website, there is an effect that it can be quickly estimated.

It is a figure which shows the web page diagnostic order determination system 100 which is Example 1 of this invention. 5 is a flowchart showing the operation of the web page diagnosis order determination system 100. It is a figure which shows the example of the list of the web page (URL) which comprises the diagnostic target website about one diagnostic target website. It is a figure which shows the example of the HTML document of a web page. It is a figure which shows the example of the hierarchical structure of the HTML element which comprises a target web page with a tree diagram. It is a figure which shows the example of the HTML element in the object web page whose URL ID is 1, and the number of diagnostic items. It is a figure which shows the relationship between the web page which comprises a target website, and the number of diagnostic items in each web page. It is a figure which shows the example of the analysis result of the relationship between the structure of HTML, and a web page. It is a figure which shows the example of the analysis result of the relationship between the structure of HTML, and a web page.

  The modes for carrying out the invention are the following examples.

  When extracting a part of a design that is not preferable from the viewpoint of accessibility in a web page, it can be extracted by a conventional accessibility check tool. The web page is described in a markup language such as HTML, and the markup language clearly describes the meaning of a certain object by tagging. For example, there are the following HTML formats for images.

  <img source = “picture1.jpg” alt = “Volleyball tournament photos”>

  This is picture1. This means that an image called jpg is displayed, and the alternative text is “photo of volleyball tournament”. The speech-to-speech software reads out the above-mentioned “photo of volleyball tournament”, which is an alternative text, with synthesized speech instead of reading out an image.

  In order to diagnose whether the design of this part is appropriate, the file name of the image and the alternative text can be obtained by parsing the HTML source file. Parse the source file by searching for img, source, etc. When diagnosing whether or not the alternative text appropriately represents the meaning of the image, it is necessary for a human to compare and determine the image and the alternative text. In other words, since the technology for extracting the meaning of an image is still under development, it needs to be determined by a human.

  In addition, there are images that should be ignored in assistive technologies such as assistive technologies and speech-to-speech software. For example, a decorative image used for layout is ignored by assistive technology such as voice-to-speech software because there is no information conveyed by the image. In this case, it is described as follows.

  <img source = “spacer1.jpg” alt = “”>

  Since the contents of the alt attribute, that is, the alternative text is blank, nothing is read out. In this case, it is appropriate as an alternative text that nothing is read out, and a human judgment is required. As described above, whether or not the alternative text is appropriate requires human judgment.

  In an example other than images, for example, in order to emphasize and display the part of “Everyone” in the sentence “Let's all participate in the tournament support,” use the em element to express the emphasis. It can be expressed as:

  <p> <em> Everyone </ em> will participate in the tournament support. </ p>

  With this description, assistive technologies such as speech-to-speech software can understand that “everyone” is emphasized. When displayed in a browser, the word “all” is shown in italics. However, the word “everyone” may be displayed in italics in the same browser even if it is written as follows using a cite element representing citation.

  <p> <cite> Everyone </ cite> participate in the tournament support. </ p>

  In other words, the browser display looks the same in terms of italics, but assistive technologies such as speech-to-speech software cannot understand that “everyone” is a quote. Such erroneous markup, that is, tagging, is another example of an improper design. To diagnose such a design, it is necessary to display the tagged characters and determine whether their meaning is correctly marked up. This determination is also difficult to perform mechanically and requires human determination.

  In order to reduce the number of human judgments and efficiently perform accessibility diagnosis, it is possible to omit the diagnosis at the time of this diagnosis for designs that are commonly used in the previous diagnosis and the current diagnosis. desirable.

  One website is composed of a plurality of web pages, and one web page is composed of a plurality of HTML components such as images. Effective accessibility diagnostics can be performed by determining how commonly the elements present on a web page within a website are used.

  FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating a web page diagnosis order determination system 100 that is Embodiment 1 of the present invention.

  The web page diagnosis result management system 100 includes a transmission / reception unit 11, a control unit 12, an information analysis unit 13, an information storage unit 14, an information input unit 15, and an information output unit 16.

  The web page diagnosis order determination system 100 corresponds to a PC main body, the information input means 15 corresponds to an input system such as a keyboard and a mouse, and the information output means 16 corresponds to a monitor and a speaker, and determines the web page diagnosis order. Used for system operation. The web page diagnosis order determination system 100 communicates with the web server 200 via the network NW1 to receive and diagnose web pages.

  In the first embodiment, the HTML elements of the target web page are analyzed in a hierarchical structure, the number of uses in the website is investigated for each HTML component such as an image, and the number of uses of each component is Determine the order of diagnosis on the page.

  In addition, if a large number of web pages using HTML components are diagnosed in a website, it is easy to guess the level of accessibility in the entire website.

  The transmission / reception means 11 receives a web page from the web server 200 via the network NW1.

  The information analysis unit 13 is an example of an HTML element extraction unit that extracts HTML elements constituting a web page. Further, the information analysis means 13 is an HTML component identification means for identifying an HTML constituent constituted by the HTML element extracted by the HTML element extraction means and a hierarchical structure including the HTML element. It is an example.

  The control unit 12 is an example of a component counting unit that counts HTML components configured by an HTML element and a hierarchical structure including the HTML element in a website. The control unit 12 is an example of a diagnosis necessity determination unit that determines whether or not there is a need to perform a diagnosis on the HTML component, and is based on the number of HTML components that need the diagnosis. It is an example of the diagnostic order determination means which determines the order of diagnosis.

  The diagnostic order determining means counts the number of web pages containing HTML components in the website, and configures the predetermined HTML components in descending order of the number of web pages including the predetermined HTML components. This is a means for determining the order of HTML components to be diagnosed so that the objects are subjected to accessibility diagnosis.

  In addition, the diagnosis order determining means is configured so that the web pages to be diagnosed are diagnosed so that the web pages are diagnosed in ascending order of the number of manual diagnosis items in the HTML component to be diagnosed included in the predetermined web page. It is a means for determining the order.

  The information storage means 14 records the diagnosis target web page data, records the web page received from the web server 200, records the HTML element extracted from the web page, and includes the HTML element and the HTML element. The HTML structure constituted by the existing hierarchical structure is recorded. Further, the information storage unit 14 arranges the diagnosis target web page data, the number of check tool diagnosis items, the number of manual diagnosis items, the diagnosis target web page data, and the diagnosis target web pages in order of decreasing number of manual diagnosis items. Record the results.

  Next, the operation of the web page diagnosis order determination system 100 will be described.

  FIG. 2 is a flowchart showing the operation of the web page diagnosis order determination system 100.

  FIG. 3 is a diagram showing an example of a list of web pages (URLs) constituting the diagnosis target website for one diagnosis target website.

  In S1, the web page diagnosis order determination system 100 reads the diagnosis target web page data shown in FIG. 3, the web page is received by the transmission / reception means 11 from the web server 200 via the network NW1 and recorded in the information storage means 14 via the control means 12 in S2.

  In S3, for the content included in the recorded web page, the information analysis means 13 extracts the HTML element constituting the web page, and the extracted HTML element and the hierarchy including the HTML element The structure of the HTML constituted by the structure is identified. This identified HTML component is recorded in the information storage means 14.

  Next, a method for analyzing content included in a recorded web page will be described.

  FIG. 4 is a diagram illustrating an example of an HTML document of a web page.

  The web page is composed of an HTML document as shown in FIG.

  FIG. 5 is a diagram showing an example of a hierarchical structure of HTML elements constituting the target web page in a tree diagram.

  When the hierarchical structure is analyzed and expressed in a tree diagram, it is as shown in FIG. This hierarchical structure can be analyzed by a general parser.

  FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating an example of HTML components and the number of diagnostic items in a target web page whose URL ID is 1.

  The analysis results are summarized as shown in FIG. 6, and an ID number is assigned to each row. This one row is referred to as an HTML component (hereinafter also simply referred to as “component”). The bottom layer of the structure shown in FIG. 6 may be an HTML structure that is a meta element, such as an ID1 HTML structure, or a text structure, such as an ID3 HTML structure. is there.

  In FIG. 6, each of the first to sixth layers is an HTML element, for example, an http element, a head element, or a meta element.

  Since the HTML components can be grasped as described above, the number of diagnostic items can be determined based on accessibility guidelines such as JIS X 8341-3. Among the diagnosis items, there are an item that can be diagnosed with the check tool (check tool diagnosis item) and an item that cannot be diagnosed with the check tool (manual diagnosis item). FIG. 6 is a diagram in which the total number of these diagnostic items is added.

  In the diagnostic rules based on accessibility guidelines such as JIS X 8341-3, there are many rules for diagnosing each individual component. For example, considering the img element, an item that can be diagnosed by the check tool whether the img element has an alt attribute (check tool diagnosis item) and a diagnosis item that indicates whether the alt attribute value is appropriate (manual diagnosis item) There are two diagnostic items. Thus, since the diagnosis item is determined when the HTML component to be diagnosed is determined, the number of diagnosis items can be determined.

  FIG. 6 shows the result of analyzing the web page of www.xxx.jp/index1.html in which the URL ID shown in FIG. In the example shown in FIG. 6, when the number of items is added, the number of diagnostic items that must be performed by the check tool is 16, and the number of diagnostic items that must be performed manually is 22. Therefore, the total number of diagnostic items is 38. The number of check tool diagnostic items, the number of manual diagnostic items, and the total number of diagnostic items added to FIG. 3 (FIG. 7) is recorded in the information storage unit 14.

  FIG. 7 is a diagram showing the relationship between the web pages constituting the target website and the number of diagnostic items in each web page.

  By adding the number of check tool diagnosis items and the number of manual diagnosis items in each web page (each URL) to FIG. 3 in which a list of web pages (URLs) constituting the diagnosis target website is described, FIG. Is recorded in the information storage means 14. Note that it can be mechanically quickly determined whether a certain diagnostic item is a check tool diagnostic item or a manual diagnostic item.

  Next, the process of S1-S3 is repeated until the analysis of all the web pages is complete | finished by S4. At this time, comparison is made for each ID of the component, and if there is the same component, the same ID is assigned. As a result, the ID number of the last component indicates the total number of different components. When all the above processes are completed, FIG. 7 is completed.

  By the processing so far, the results shown in FIG. 6 are created for each of all the web pages, and the creation of FIG. 7 is completed.

  In the example shown in FIG. 7, the web page with the smallest number of manual diagnosis items is the web page with the URL ID of 6, so the accessibility diagnosis is first executed for the web page with the URL ID of 6. . As a result, if the good accessibility rate is 70%, it can be estimated that the good accessibility rate in the diagnosis target website including the web page whose URL ID is 6 is 70%. When estimating the degree of consideration for accessibility on the website to be diagnosed, using a web page with few manual diagnosis items and performing an accessibility diagnosis shortens the time required to estimate the result of the entire accessibility diagnosis. The degree of consideration for accessibility on the site can be estimated in a short time.

  FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating an example of an analysis result of a relationship between an HTML component and a web page.

  For the content included in the web page, the information analysis means 13 analyzes the HTML elements constituting the HTML component into a hierarchical structure, and an example of the analysis result is an example shown in FIG. That is, the used web page is recorded in the information storage unit 14 for each constituent. That is, for each component ID, it indicates which web page (URL) the component is used. If it is used on a web page, “1” is written in FIG. 8 and must be used. “0” is written.

  For each row in the example shown in FIG. 8, the number of used (adopted) components is measured, and this measured number is described in the “Number of Adopted Web Pages” column of FIG. 8. Yes. In FIG. 8, 12847 is the last component ID. That is, the example shown in FIG. 8 indicates that 12847 different constituents are used in the website.

  In order to perform all accessibility diagnosis, as shown in FIG. 8, accessibility diagnosis must be performed for the total number of web pages in which the components are adopted.

  In order to effectively estimate the diagnosis result with a small number of diagnoses, it is only necessary to diagnose the components used in as many web pages as possible in the order of the number of web pages used. That is, the constituents may be diagnosed in the order of the number of adopted web pages. To complete the diagnosis, it is necessary to finally diagnose all the components, but by using the method of Example 1, it is possible to roughly diagnose a web page having many of the same components with a small number of diagnoses. It will be done.

  For this reason, with regard to the degree of consideration of accessibility in a predetermined website, the tendency of accessibility in the entire predetermined website can be grasped earlier, and thus it is effective. In other words, as shown in FIG. 8, if the IDs of the constituents are rearranged in the descending order of the number of adopted web pages and the accessibility diagnosis is performed on one or a small number of web pages from the constituents having the largest number of adopted web pages, Quickly understand accessibility trends across the entire website.

  When only a limited time can be diagnosed in advance, the entire diagnosis result can be estimated based on the result of diagnosing some web pages.

  In S6, with reference to FIG. 8, it is determined whether or not the web page includes the component in order from the component having the smallest number of adopted web pages.

  Here, for the sake of simplicity, the case shown in FIG. 9 will be described. That is, a method for determining the order of accessibility diagnosis for web pages with URLs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 (web page 1, web page 2, web page 3, web page 4, web page 5) will be described.

  FIG. 9 is a diagram illustrating an example of an analysis result of a relationship between an HTML component and a web page.

  First, among the components shown in FIG. 9, the ID of the component having the smallest number of adopted web pages is 7 or 8, but when the number of adopted web pages is the same, a predetermined judgment such as the order of the Japanese syllabary is made. As a result of assigning the order according to the reference, it is assumed that the component ID 8 is the last. Then, pay attention to the component of ID8 of this last component. In the analysis result shown in FIG. 8, the web page 1 (web page whose web page URL is 1) and the web page 2 (web page whose web page URL is 2) have a constituent with ID 8 of the constituent. It is used, and the composition of ID8 of composition is not used in other web pages. Then, the order of the web pages having a small number of IDs is left later. For this purpose, Web pages 1 and 2 are the last.

  The method of determining the order of the web pages 1 and 2 is determined by the number of components to be diagnosed included in the web page. The web page 1 includes seven components, and the web page 2 includes six components. The more the number of components, the longer it takes to diagnose. Therefore, the web page 1 having more components than the web page 2 is diagnosed last (fifth), and the web page 2 is diagnosed fourth.

  Next, looking at the ID 7 of the component, since it is used in the web page 4 other than the web page 1 in which the order is determined, the web page 4 is diagnosed third. In addition, when the ID 8 of the component is seen, it is used in the web page 2 in addition to the web page 1 in which the order is determined. However, since the web page 2 is diagnosed fourth as described above, the web page 2 4 is diagnosed third.

  Next, looking at the ID 6 of the component, since it is used in the web page 3 other than the web pages 1 and 4 in which the order is determined, the web page 3 is diagnosed second, and the remaining The web page 5 is diagnosed first.

  In this way, the first accessibility diagnosis is the web page 5, the second accessibility diagnosis is the web page 3, and the third accessibility diagnosis is the web page 4. The fourth accessibility diagnosis is the web page 2, and the fifth accessibility diagnosis is the web page 1, and thus the diagnosis order is determined. By diagnosing web pages according to the order determined in this way, accessibility diagnosis is performed in ascending order of the number of components to be diagnosed included in the web page, so it is possible to quickly grasp the overall trend of accessibility. it can. That is, by diagnosing a composition in which many IDs of the composition are used, it is possible to quickly grasp the overall accessibility trend on the website.

  In the above-described embodiment, the information analysis unit 13 is an example of an HTML element extraction unit that extracts an HTML element that constitutes a web page, and is an example of an HTML element analysis unit that classifies information including information on the hierarchy of the HTML element. .

  The control unit 12 is an example of a component counting unit that counts HTML components configured by an HTML element and a hierarchical structure including the HTML element in a website. The control unit 12 is an example of a diagnosis necessity determination unit that determines whether or not there is a need to perform a diagnosis on the HTML component, and is based on the number of HTML components that need the diagnosis. It is an example of the diagnostic order determination means which determines the order of diagnosis.

  The diagnostic order determining means counts the number of web pages that contain HTML components in the website, and the predetermined HTML in descending order of the number of web pages that contain the prescribed HTML components. This is a means for determining the order of the HTML components to be diagnosed so that the components are subjected to accessibility diagnosis. In addition, the diagnosis order determining means is configured so that the web pages to be diagnosed are diagnosed so that the web pages are diagnosed in ascending order of the number of manual diagnosis items in the HTML component to be diagnosed included in the predetermined web page. It is a means for determining the order.

  In the second embodiment of the present invention, the target web page is decomposed into contents, the number of uses in the website is investigated for each HTML component such as an image, and the number of uses (adopted number) of each component is determined. This is an embodiment for determining the order of diagnosis of web pages.

  In Example 1, when the analysis result shown in FIG. In this operation, the presence or absence of a component that needs to be diagnosed manually is counted in consideration of the presence or absence of manual diagnosis, and the analysis result shown in FIG. 7 is created.

  As a result, only manual diagnosis items can be arranged in order, and an effective diagnosis can be performed. Since the detailed procedure is the same as that of the first embodiment, the description thereof is omitted.

  The above embodiment is a system for determining the order in which web pages are diagnosed. Specifically, the accessibility of web pages is diagnosed. However, the target of diagnosis need not be limited to accessibility, and usability that is convenient for a user who uses a web page may be diagnosed. For example, do designers make their own rules regarding whether it is preferable to provide such buttons on the screen or ads on the screen in this way, and whether the resulting web page conforms to the above rules? Diagnose it. In this case, the above embodiment may be applied.

  Moreover, the said Example can be grasped | ascertained as invention of a method. That is, in the first embodiment, the HTML element extraction means extracts the HTML elements constituting the web page and stores them in the storage device, and the HTML component identification means extracts in the HTML element extraction process. An HTML component identification step for identifying an HTML component configured by the HTML element and the hierarchical structure including the HTML element, and storing the HTML component in a storage device; The component counting step for counting HTML components in a website and storing them in a storage device and the diagnostic necessity determination means determine whether or not there is a need to diagnose the HTML components. The diagnosis necessity determination step stored in the storage device and the diagnosis order determination means determine the diagnosis order based on the number of HTML components having the necessity of diagnosis. Constant and an example of a web page diagnostic order determined method characterized by having a diagnostic sequence determination step of storing in a storage device.

  Further, the above embodiment can be grasped as a program invention. That is, the program which makes a computer function as each means which comprises the web page diagnostic order determination system of any one of Claims 1-4 can be assumed.

100 ... Web page diagnostic result management system,
11: Transmission / reception means,
12 ... Control means,
13: Information analysis means,
14: Information storage means,
15 ... Information input means,
16: Information output means.

Claims (9)

HTML element extracting means for extracting HTML elements constituting a web page;
HTML component identification means for identifying an HTML component constituted by the HTML element extracted by the HTML element extraction means and a hierarchical structure including the HTML element;
A constituent counting means for counting the constituents of the HTML in a website;
A diagnosis necessity determining means for determining whether or not there is a need to diagnose the HTML component;
A diagnostic order determining means for determining the order of diagnosis based on the number of HTML components that need to be diagnosed;
A web page diagnosis order determination system characterized by comprising: In claim 1,
The diagnostic order determining means counts the number of web pages containing HTML components in the website, and configures the predetermined HTML components in descending order of the number of web pages including the predetermined HTML components. A web page diagnosis order determination system, characterized in that it is means for determining the order of HTML components to be diagnosed so as to diagnose an object. In claim 1,
The diagnosis order determining means determines the order of the web pages to be diagnosed so that the web pages are diagnosed in ascending order of the number of manual diagnosis items in the HTML component to be diagnosed included in the predetermined web page. A web page diagnosis order determination system characterized by being a means for determination. In any one of Claims 1-3,
A web page diagnosis order determination system, wherein the diagnosis is an accessibility diagnosis or a usability diagnosis. An HTML element extracting step in which the HTML element extracting means extracts the HTML elements constituting the web page and stores them in the storage device;
The HTML component identification means identifies the HTML component constituted by the HTML element extracted in the HTML element extraction step and the hierarchical structure including the HTML element, and stores it in a storage device. HTML component identification process;
A component counting step in which the component counting means counts the HTML components in the website and stores them in a storage device;
A diagnostic necessity determining step in which a diagnosis necessity determining means determines whether or not there is a need to diagnose the HTML component, and stores it in a storage device;
A diagnosis order determining step in which the diagnosis order determining means determines the order of diagnosis based on the number of HTML components that need to be diagnosed and stores the order in the storage device;
A web page diagnosis order determination method characterized by comprising: In claim 5,
In the diagnosis order determination step, the number of web pages containing HTML components in the website is counted, and the predetermined HTML configuration is arranged in descending order of the number of web pages including the predetermined HTML components. A method for determining the order of diagnosis of web pages, which is a step of determining the order of HTML components to be diagnosed so as to diagnose an object. In claim 5,
In the diagnosis order determining step, the web pages to be diagnosed are diagnosed so that the web pages are diagnosed in ascending order of the number of manual diagnosis items among the constituents of HTML to be diagnosed included in the predetermined web page. A method for determining the order of web page diagnosis, characterized in that the order is determined. In any one of Claims 5-7,
The method of determining a web page diagnosis order, wherein the diagnosis is an accessibility diagnosis or a usability diagnosis.   The program which makes a computer function as each means which comprises the web page diagnostic order determination system of any one of Claims 1-4.

Images