W3C Validator, Accessibility & Link Checks... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Web Development] >> Accessibility



Message

Nicole -> W3C Validator, Accessibility & Link Checks... (12/21/2004 6:53:19)

... I hope this topic fits this forum, i really didn't know where to post it.

I'm planning to make my site comply with the 3 validators in the heading over the holiday period and i've checked every page in my site and found it has totals of 556 W3C html validator errors, 7682 Accessibility errors and 11 link errors.

I'm figuring this will be a good way for me to get practice at proper coding, and i also 'assume' a lot of the errors, especially those concerning accessibility will repeat themselves many times throughout the site, therefore i shouldn't be as big a drama as it seems.

My question is, should i make my site comply with accessibility first before turning my attention to the html validator? Will the changes i make to the accessibility affect the html in a way it could create more errors in the W3C validator?

I'm also wondering if i have to choose 'strict' language to completely correct all errors, or will 'transitional' make them all correct?

Apologies if my use of some terms are incorrect.

Thanks

Nicole



bobby -> RE: W3C Validator, Accessibility & Link Checks... (12/22/2004 15:38:15)

Transitional will be easier to validate... because it's not as strict as strict [;)]

I would validate the HTML and CSS first, then go on to the accesibility issues...

There may be some things that break while you're tweaking one or the other, but they should all resolve pretty easily. (And they shouldn't rely on the same validation)

And yes, many of the errors you're seeing are likely duplicates... you might see 300 of the same error pop up on a given page.



d a v e -> RE: W3C Validator, Accessibility & Link Checks... (12/22/2004 15:55:01)

also the more standards compliant you make your code the better it will be for accessibility - it's one of the requirements for the cynthia says checks

this is my fave link at the mo (whole book online free)
http://joeclark.org/book/sashay/serialization/



jaybee -> RE: W3C Validator, Accessibility & Link Checks... (12/22/2004 18:08:14)

quote:

556 W3C html validator errors, 7682 Accessibility errors and 11 link errors.


Crumbs! [&:]

I do mine one page at a time. It's not quite so daunting that way.

What are you validating against? XHTML 1.1 Strict?

First thing I would do is go through and change all <br> to <br />

make sure all <img statements end with /> rather than just > and put alt="blahblahblah" for each. While you're at it stick a title="blahblahblah" in as well for Cynthia.

Make sure all stuff after = in the HTML is surrounded by " "

and make sure everything is in lowercase. I had one statement that drove me nuts; it was onClick. Changed it to onclick and it validated.

That usually gets rid of the odd 500 or so errors.

Have fun. [:D]



Nicole -> RE: W3C Validator, Accessibility & Link Checks... (12/22/2004 18:23:20)

Hi Jaybee,

quote:

What are you validating against? XHTML 1.1 Strict?


That is what i was going to validate against until someone here suggested "transitional". My concern is, if i only validate for transitional, won't some errors still appear when testing for accessibility?

Thanks for the other tips too, AND WHO's CYNTHIA???

I only checked all the errors at once the other night because i was bored lol, but as i've said, this will be good practice for me and learn at the same time while i have a few spare minutes over the holiday period.

Just one other question on accessibility, dealing with colour-blindness. I've found a link which tests each url you submit, but is the idea to just make sure that images and text are still readable for all the colour-blind conditions?

On this site too, it conducts a test for "coverage test black/white/grey" and my page is just blacked out or whited out etc. Is that some kind of colour-blind condition or just some sort of other test?

Thanks again

Nicole



jaybee -> RE: W3C Validator, Accessibility & Link Checks... (12/22/2004 18:56:21)

It depends. There are code errors and accessibilty errors and some of them are the same thing, some aren't.

If you get your html and css clean then you're a long way down the accessibility route. Transitional/Strict won't neccessarily cause our Cynth to throw a wobbler. Bad code of any kind will.

Cynthia is a good friend of Bobby. [:D]

Ok, she's a method of validating for AAA rating. You can also use Bobby. There are 3 levels A, AA, AAA. Tough to get the AAA rating but AA reasonably easy and gives a good standard of access.

Colourblindness checkers do as you suggest. They allow you to ensure that there is sufficient contrast for your content to show up if someone has a blue, red or yellow deficiency.

It's far too late to attempt to get my head round the black/white thing. Get your site clear in the others and it'll be fine.



d a v e -> RE: W3C Validator, Accessibility & Link Checks... (12/23/2004 3:24:27)

http://www.cynthiasays.com/

http://bobby.watchfire.com/bobby/html/en/index.jsp

also a note on the colourblindness thing - it doesn't mean for example that you can't use red and green on the same page as long as you don't place them together or use them to signify different things that can't be determined by a colour blind user. so green links red background is out for example...



bobby -> RE: W3C Validator, Accessibility & Link Checks... (12/23/2004 11:01:42)

quote:

You can also use Bobby.

Yes... I validate thee

[sm=tongue.gif]



jaybee -> RE: W3C Validator, Accessibility & Link Checks... (12/24/2004 4:33:29)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bobby

quote:

You can also use Bobby.

Yes... I validate thee

[sm=tongue.gif]


Not that you'll get much sense out of him.

[:D]



d a v e -> RE: W3C Validator, Accessibility & Link Checks... (12/24/2004 4:48:20)

yep i agree - cynthia looks like a demonic librarian but she knows more or less what she's talking about ;)

btw nice avatar jb



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.0625