E-mail List Archives
Thread: Content Management Systems
Number of posts in this thread: 18 (In chronological order)
From: John E. Brandt
Date: Fri, Jan 27 2006 9:00AM
Subject: Content Management Systems
No previous message | Next message →
I'm wondering if any one has any reviews on content management systems that
produce valid code and accessible designs. Most of the ones I've looked at
use XML/XHTML which would lead you to believe that there is "well formed"
code present and accessibility valued. However, most of the websites
designed with CMS I have looked at have suffered from some bad coding and
accessibility errors. I'd like to have a few to recommend to clients.
Any suggestions?
John E. Brandt
Augusta, ME USA
www.jebswebs.com
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
From: Daniel Champion
Date: Fri, Jan 27 2006 9:15AM
Subject: Re: Content Management Systems
← Previous message | Next message →
Have a look at Colony - http://www.thinkcolony.co.uk
I'm not a user but it looks impressive.
Dan
--
Daniel Champion - Web Dev Mgr - Clackmannanshire Council
e: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = t: 01259 452258
f: 01259 452265 w: http://www.clacksweb.org.uk
"John E. Brandt" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent by: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
27/01/06 15:57
Please respond to WebAIM Discussion List
To: "'WebAIM Discussion List'" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
cc:
Subject: [WebAIM] Content Management Systems
I'm wondering if any one has any reviews on content management systems
that
produce valid code and accessible designs. Most of the ones I've looked at
use XML/XHTML which would lead you to believe that there is "well formed"
code present and accessibility valued. However, most of the websites
designed with CMS I have looked at have suffered from some bad coding and
accessibility errors. I'd like to have a few to recommend to clients.
Any suggestions?
John E. Brandt
Augusta, ME USA
www.jebswebs.com
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
This email and any attachments have been scanned for viruses prior to leaving Clackmannanshire Council.
Clackmannanshire Council will not be liable for any losses as a result of viruses being passed on.
www.clacksweb.org.uk
From: Tim Beadle
Date: Fri, Jan 27 2006 9:30AM
Subject: Re: Content Management Systems
← Previous message | Next message →
On 27/01/06, John E. Brandt < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> I'm wondering if any one has any reviews on content management systems that
> produce valid code and accessible designs. Most of the ones I've looked at
> use XML/XHTML which would lead you to believe that there is "well formed"
> code present and accessibility valued. However, most of the websites
> designed with CMS I have looked at have suffered from some bad coding and
> accessibility errors. I'd like to have a few to recommend to clients.
>
> Any suggestions?
Drupal?
"Drupal is Section 508 and WCAG Priority 1, 2, 3 compliant.
Strict coding standards have been used to keep Drupal's data, logic
and presentation separate from each other. This means that the mark-up
of all of Drupal's output is completely controlled by the
application's presentation layer, known as the 'theme'.
The accessibility compliance of a Drupal powered site depends on which
theme is being used."
http://drupal.org/node/44661
Regards,
Tim
From: Joshue O Connor
Date: Fri, Jan 27 2006 10:30AM
Subject: Re: Content Management Systems
← Previous message | Next message →
Also check out XOOPS
http://www.xoops.org/modules/news/article.php?storyid=2349
Josh
Joshue O Connor
Web Accessibility Consultant
**Centre for Inclusive Technology (CFIT)* *
National Council for the Blind of Ireland
Website:http://www.cfit.ie
E-Mail: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Tim Beadle wrote:
> On 27/01/06, John E. Brandt < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>
>>I'm wondering if any one has any reviews on content management systems that
>>produce valid code and accessible designs. Most of the ones I've looked at
>>use XML/XHTML which would lead you to believe that there is "well formed"
>>code present and accessibility valued. However, most of the websites
>>designed with CMS I have looked at have suffered from some bad coding and
>>accessibility errors. I'd like to have a few to recommend to clients.
>>
>>Any suggestions?
>
>
> Drupal?
>
> "Drupal is Section 508 and WCAG Priority 1, 2, 3 compliant.
>
> Strict coding standards have been used to keep Drupal's data, logic
> and presentation separate from each other. This means that the mark-up
> of all of Drupal's output is completely controlled by the
> application's presentation layer, known as the 'theme'.
>
> The accessibility compliance of a Drupal powered site depends on which
> theme is being used."
> http://drupal.org/node/44661
>
> Regards,
>
> Tim
>
>
>
>
>
From: John E. Brandt
Date: Fri, Jan 27 2006 11:00AM
Subject: RE: Content Management Systems
← Previous message | Next message →
Thank you Tim and Daniel.
Not to be nasty, but you if you run Drupal through the W3C HTML validity, it
does not pass. There are several coding errors.
Thinkology passed the validation test.
I did not test either home page for accessibility.
This is exactly what I am referring to. CMS that are designed to make
accessible and valid code - and something a user does, makes the code
invalid.
Maybe I am hoping for a perfect world, but are there programs out there that
are "foolproof" - no offense. I'll take a better look at Thinkology.
Any comprehensive reviews out there of multiple products? Sounds like a good
research project/article for the WebAIM News!!! Hint-hint.
~jeb
John E. Brandt
Augusta, ME USA
www.jebswebs.com
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
From: Christian Heilmann
Date: Fri, Jan 27 2006 11:30AM
Subject: Re: Content Management Systems
← Previous message | Next message →
> Thank you Tim and Daniel.
> Not to be nasty, but you if you run Drupal through the W3C HTML validity, it
> does not pass. There are several coding errors.
> Thinkology passed the validation test.
> I did not test either home page for accessibility.
> This is exactly what I am referring to. CMS that are designed to make
> accessible and valid code - and something a user does, makes the code
> invalid.
> Maybe I am hoping for a perfect world, but are there programs out there that
> are "foolproof" - no offense. I'll take a better look at Thinkology.
> Any comprehensive reviews out there of multiple products? Sounds like a good
> research project/article for the WebAIM News!!! Hint-hint.
Accessibility is not a technical problem, it involves content and user
interaction as much as clean code. Therefore even well-intended CMS
can only pay lip service to accessibility guidelines.
True, some CMS will make it impossible for you to create accessible
content as they mess with your code and don't actually offer any real
separation of content and presentation/structure (Contribute for
example).
In general, every CMS is as good and accessible as its users are
trained on the subject. What most CMS that claim accessibility do is
force alt attributes and maybe do an XHTML validity check.
I have worked with immediacy (http://www.immediacy.co.uk) before who
scream about accessibility guidelines compliance and was amazed how
many myths and outright errors were sold as best practice in the
training. However, the training for content editors was quite OK, as
it did explain the problems with layout in word vs. adding content
that fits a pattern in the templates. The CMS also has something like
Bobby included which tells you about the biggest technical boo-boos.
The issue is that CMS users expect bullet proof layouts and
fancyschmancy drag and drop interfaces and inline WYSIWYG editing,
which leads to table layouts (of the really bad kind) and generated
code that reads like the chinese translated instructions to your alarm
clock.
WYSIWYG will lead to non-trained editors writing text for the current
theme and not for end users - which is understandable as it _is_
tempting to write for the looks of the site.
Next week - so the editors will - I will publish a double feature on
Digital Web about symptoms projects showed that eventually failed to
deliver accessibility - and one of them is believing in a product like
a CMS without realising its problems or properly training anyone using
it how to use it sensibly. Technology can only get us so far.
As for the subject of validating web sites with the w3c validator and
considering them accessible dependent on the outcome: Validation is a
means to an end. You can create perfectly valid XHTML that is totally
inaccessible, bloated and semantic nonsense. At the same time a great,
semantically correct web site with one unencoded ampersand fails
validation - which one should we prefer?
HTH
Chris
--
Chris Heilmann
Blog: http://www.wait-till-i.com
Writing: http://icant.co.uk/
Binaries: http://www.onlinetools.org/
From: Austin, Darrel
Date: Fri, Jan 27 2006 1:15PM
Subject: RE: Content Management Systems
← Previous message | Next message →
> Maybe I am hoping for a perfect world, but are there programs
> out there that are "foolproof" - no offense. I'll take a
> better look at Thinkology.
The issue is that most content management systems really aren't content
management systems. They are page editors. Most of them, by default, are
set up so you can make a page, and then edit most of the content via a
WYSIWYG editor. If there is any structured data templates, it's usually
just a template for a press release.
After spending a year searching for a product ourselves, we finally
decided the option for us was to build a CMS that strictly did
that...maintained our content. We are using Xstandard as the WYSISWYG
editor which is the best editor we could find in terms of forcing
semantic and accessible content editing.
We then wrote our own custom front end, so we weren't depending on the
CMS itself to handle any page rendering.
The key to finding a good CMS is to make sure you find one that can
store the content in a semantic, clean way (XML or standard HTML) and
one that doesn't add ANYTHING to the content before hitting your
template. You also don't want to have to depend on the CMS tool's own
custom template engine. You should be able to make your own templates in
any fashion you desire and only call the content that you need at any
given time.
>
> Any comprehensive reviews out there of multiple products?
Nope. The CMS market is 90% marketing brochures and 10% real comparison
data. ;o)
-Darrel
From: John Middleton
Date: Fri, Jan 27 2006 2:00PM
Subject: Re: Content Management Systems
← Previous message | Next message →
Joomla (http://www.joomla.org) a recent spin off from the Mambo
<http://swik.net/Mambo>; CMS program states in it's roadmap
<http://www.joomla.org/content/view/635/37/>; to target accessibility issues.
I believe the accessibility compliance depends on which theme is used.
The term 'accessibility compliance' may or may not match your or my
requirement.
I have no experience using this package, however I am encouraging this
accessible CMS topic for my interests as well.
Regards,
JM
From: Webmaster
Date: Fri, Jan 27 2006 4:00PM
Subject: RE: Content Management Systems
← Previous message | Next message →
In many cases, it's possible to make the output of the CMS accessible.
This depends on:
--how clean/good is the code that the WYSIWYG editor generates; and
--how clean/good is your template code.
The bigger problem in my opinion is the accessibility of the actual CMS
interface as a web application/web client. What if users of assistive
technology actually have to use the CMS to edit their web content? I'm
just guessing, but I bet most vendors fail pretty miserably in this
area.
--Peter
___________________________
Peter Mosinskis
Web Services Supervisor
California State University Channel Islands (CSUCI)
One University Drive
Camarillo CA 93012
805-437-8587 phone
805-437-8552 fax
From: Kynn Bartlett
Date: Fri, Jan 27 2006 4:30PM
Subject: Re: Content Management Systems
← Previous message | Next message →
That's probably the case. See, what most CMS developers don't realize
is that they not only have to conform to WCAG, but also to ATAG
(Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines).
I worked for a content management system company for a while. I tell
you, they could barely understand what I was trying to tell them about
the accessibility of the output, let alone the accessibility of the
tool itself. It's like I was speaking a foreign language.
Um, well, okay, the fact that they were Belgian didn't help things any.
--Kynn
On 1/27/06, Webmaster < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> The bigger problem in my opinion is the accessibility of the actual CMS
> interface as a web application/web client. What if users of assistive
> technology actually have to use the CMS to edit their web content? I'm
> just guessing, but I bet most vendors fail pretty miserably in this
> area.
From: Webmaster Docebo Projects
Date: Sat, Jan 28 2006 4:00AM
Subject: Re: Content Management Systems
← Previous message | Next message →
John E. Brandt wrote:
> I'm wondering if any one has any reviews on content management systems that
> produce valid code and accessible designs. Most of the ones I've looked at
> use XML/XHTML which would lead you to believe that there is "well formed"
> code present and accessibility valued. However, most of the websites
> designed with CMS I have looked at have suffered from some bad coding and
> accessibility errors. I'd like to have a few to recommend to clients.
>
>
Hello, we develop the doceboCMS and it is validated xhtml 1.1
You can see our community on www.docebocms.org and the accessibility
project (where you can validate pages) on http://accessibility.docebo.org
Claudio
--
Docebo Open source project websites are:
- http://www.docebo.org [Company site]
- http://www.docebo.org [Open source Develpers community]
- http://www.docebolms.org [E-learning support]
- http://www.docebocms.org [CMS support]
- http://www.docebokms.org [KMS support]
From: Kynn Bartlett
Date: Sat, Jan 28 2006 7:15AM
Subject: Re: Content Management Systems
← Previous message | Next message →
On 1/28/06, Webmaster Docebo Projects < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Hello, we develop the doceboCMS and it is validated xhtml 1.1
> You can see our community on www.docebocms.org and the accessibility
> project (where you can validate pages) on http://accessibility.docebo.org
How does it measure up against ATAG 1.0?
--Kynn
From: Webmaster Docebo Projects
Date: Sat, Jan 28 2006 7:30AM
Subject: Re: Content Management Systems
← Previous message | Next message →
Kynn Bartlett wrote:
> How does it measure up against ATAG 1.0?
>
We use FCK Editor that does not check output validity but you can use an
editor tool like http://www.kyberfabrikken.dk/opensource/indite/ that we
are going to integrate, anyway, If you also repsect atag you can
generate not accessible code (For example writing all in underline ...
), so generate accessibility aoutput is also editor responsability not
only software responsability
Claudio
--
Docebo Open source project websites are:
- http://www.docebo.org [Company site]
- http://www.docebo.org [Open source Develpers community]
- http://www.docebolms.org [E-learning support]
- http://www.docebocms.org [CMS support]
- http://www.docebokms.org [KMS support]
From: John Foliot - WATS.ca
Date: Sat, Jan 28 2006 7:45AM
Subject: RE: Content Management Systems
← Previous message | Next message →
Just to add another to the mix, have you investigated QnECMS (Quick 'n
Easy CMS), created by Jim Byrne of GAWDS (with significant
contributions of other GAWDS members)? [www.qnecms.co.uk]
I have played with it myself, and it appears to be quite good; however
as others have pointed out YMMV depending on who develops the templates
and who does the updating/content addition and management. The content
author's contribution to an accessible web site is often overlooked, and
is something that I always focus on when doing seminars and
presentations.
HTH
JF
--
John Foliot = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Web Accessibility Specialist / Co-founder of WATS.ca
Web Accessibility Testing and Services
http://www.wats.ca
Phone: 1-613-482-7053
From: Harper, Jennifer (DHS-EPIC)
Date: Mon, Jan 30 2006 1:45PM
Subject: RE: Content Management Systems
← Previous message | Next message →
What a timely topic for me! My Department (California Department of
Health Services) is planning to switch to Microsoft CMS Server to
replace our existing site. We're right now in the early design phases.
Although I have NO control over product selection, I may have a chance
to have some input on template design and implementation as it relates
to accessibility.
I welcome any advice on how we can best keep accessibility issues on the
table as we switch to CMS and lessons learned from their own
implementation in a big decentralized organization (300-ish "webmasters"
and the "master" part is used VERY loosely). Any MS-CMS Server
accessibility tips welcome as well.
Online or offline tips, resources, etc are appreciated!
------------------------------------------------------------
Jen Harper, MSPH
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
California Department of Health Services
Epidemiology and Prevention for Injury Control (EPIC) Branch
From: Kynn Bartlett
Date: Mon, Jan 30 2006 2:00PM
Subject: Re: Content Management Systems
← Previous message | Next message →
Remember to use whatever influence you have to insist that the CMS
itself be accessible technology, as well as producing accessible
output.
Otherwise, any new hires with special needs will be unable to complete
their jobs without requiring repurchase of new software.
The big problem with CMSes is not just the output, it's the interface
to create and modify content.
Has anyone on this list worked with Microsoft CMS Server? E.g., with
a screenreader or other AT?
--Kynn
On 1/30/06, Harper, Jennifer (DHS-EPIC) < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>
> What a timely topic for me! My Department (California Department of
> Health Services) is planning to switch to Microsoft CMS Server to
> replace our existing site. We're right now in the early design phases.
> Although I have NO control over product selection, I may have a chance
> to have some input on template design and implementation as it relates
> to accessibility.
>
> I welcome any advice on how we can best keep accessibility issues on the
> table as we switch to CMS and lessons learned from their own
> implementation in a big decentralized organization (300-ish "webmasters"
> and the "master" part is used VERY loosely). Any MS-CMS Server
> accessibility tips welcome as well.
>
> Online or offline tips, resources, etc are appreciated!
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Jen Harper, MSPH
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> California Department of Health Services
> Epidemiology and Prevention for Injury Control (EPIC) Branch
>
>
>
>
From: Austin, Darrel
Date: Mon, Jan 30 2006 3:30PM
Subject: RE: Content Management Systems
← Previous message | Next message →
> Has anyone on this list worked with Microsoft CMS Server?
> E.g., with a screenreader or other AT?
My understanding is that MS CMS relies a lot on MS Office and Frontpage
(and Sharepoint) so I would say the odds of it producing semantic,
accessible markup to not be terribly high. :|
BUT...I haven't used MS CMS, so maybe someone with direct experience can
chime in. We did look at Sharepoint for our intranet, but after taking
the training course, we realized it was an overpriced, overly complex,
feature-poor application. (IMHO, of course)
-Darrel
From: Rosie Sherry
Date: Tue, Jan 31 2006 5:45AM
Subject: Re: Content Management Systems
← Previous message | No next message
Our frustration in finding a suitable CMS which responds to the needs
of accessibility led to us creating our own CMS which can result in
fully accessible websites. It's also quite funky as it uses 'Web2'
technologies (a broad term, I know!).
As an example, we created the following website for our own business
requirements: www.drivenqa.com
We have created this as a product which can be made available upon request.
Regards,
Rosie Sherry
QA Consultant
On 27/01/06, John E. Brandt < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> I'm wondering if any one has any reviews on content management systems that
> produce valid code and accessible designs. Most of the ones I've looked at
> use XML/XHTML which would lead you to believe that there is "well formed"
> code present and accessibility valued. However, most of the websites
> designed with CMS I have looked at have suffered from some bad coding and
> accessibility errors. I'd like to have a few to recommend to clients.
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> John E. Brandt
> Augusta, ME USA
> www.jebswebs.com
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>
>
>
>
>
--
Rosie Sherry
Driven Systems Ltd
tel:+44 (0) 8450 580 546
mob:+44 (0) 77 309 525 37
http://www.getdriven.com/