Online Accessibility Checks (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Web Development] >> Accessibility



Message


Nicole -> Online Accessibility Checks (10/4/2005 5:18:39)

I'm using a great site that I think Tailslide posted elsewhere to validate my sites and check a host of accessability issues and other features, the site is here: UITest.com

Once you've typed your URL, 3 sites are listed to check overall accessibility, four to check WCAG 1.0 compliance, and three for s508 compliance, overall I've found that if you only have a couple of pages in a site it's not too time consuming to check all of these, but if you have a large site, it is.

I've noticed that the first link in that site, the one to the ATRC Accessibility check has now changed so you can easily retype a different page in the same web and check it, but the others don't seem to do this.

I also include the A-Promp file checker which is a good resource to check those issues which solely require manual testing, but I'm wondering firstly if others check against ALL of these programs/sites, or whether you just rely on one? If so which one and why?

Also, have any of you invested in buying any of these programs, like the HiSoftware one for instance, do you recommend buying them, what features aren't included in the free online versions etc.

Nicole

Edit: As a subsequent question, both the SIDAR and Site Valet Accessibility checks still fail a site that hasn't used access keys. We've had that debate here (who could ever forget), so why don't these two validators reflect this thinking?




womble -> RE: Online Accessibility Checks (10/4/2005 7:54:08)

quote:

Edit: As a subsequent question, both the SIDAR and Site Valet Accessibility checks still fail a site that hasn't used access keys. We've had that debate here (who could ever forget), so why don't these two validators reflect this thinking?


I suppose because it's still a WCAG requirement.

On a similar subject, I have a site that passes WCAG Priority 2 in Cynthia, and A-Prompt once I've done the manual checks, but not in Bobby and I can't figure out why the difference.




jaybee -> RE: Online Accessibility Checks (10/4/2005 8:34:47)

Well they're written by various groups so there is probably a slight difference in the way Bobby checks. You'll need to look at what it fails and then see what it wants and compare it to Cynthia.

To be honest, Cynthia is the one W3C work with and I did hear somewhere that Bobby was being phased out. Got a feeling it was Patrick White from UAWG who told me.




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.03125