Online Accessibility Checks

	Home Register Search Help Login

Sponsors

Shopping Cart Software
Ecommerce software integrated into Frontpage, Dreamweaver and Golive templates. No monthly fees and available in ASP and PHP versions.

Website Templates
We also have a wide selection of Dreamweaver, Expression Web and Frontpage templates as well as webmaster tools and CSS layouts.

Frontpage website templates
Creative Website Templates for FrontPage, Dreamweaver, Flash, SwishMax

Search Forums

Recent Posts

Todays Posts
Most Active posts
Posts since last visit
My Recent Posts
Mark posts read

Online Accessibility Checks

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> Web Development >> Accessibility >> Online Accessibility Checks

Page: [1]


Nicole Posts: 2830 Joined: 9/15/2004 From: Nambucca / Kempsey, Australia Status: offline	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? < Message edited by Nicoleoz -- 10/4/2005 5:42:39 > _____________________________


womble Posts: 5501 Joined: 3/14/2005 From: Living on the edge Status: offline	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. _____________________________ ~~ "A cruel god ain't no god at all" ~~ (in reply to Nicole)


jaybee Posts: 14122 Joined: 10/7/2003 From: Berkshire, UK Status: offline	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. _____________________________ If it ain't broke..... fix it until it is. GAWDS Now where did I put that Doctype? (in reply to womble)