WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: accessibility without testing?

for

From: Karl Groves
Date: Mar 13, 2008 3:50PM


I would say that yes, the root of what we're after here is whether a product
can be used by disabled users, so the "true" measure of accessibility is
found by having the product tested by disabled users.

At the same time, there is a LOT that can be discovered through other means.
Automated testing can be used to go through a lot of code very quickly to
find items which frankly don't need humans to find.
Manual review of the code can be used to validate items uncovered during the
automated testing and find items the automated testing wasn't able to find.
User testing would be used as a means to uncover anything not found through
the other methods and to validate the results of the other two methods.

It is important to keep in mind that JAWS is not the only assistive
technology used by disabled users. Further, different versions of JAWS may
deal with things differently. Last, the experience level of the person
testing comes into play. "User testing" with JAWS by a sighted newbie is
next to worthless, IMO.


Karl Groves
AIM/YIM: karlcore
Skype: eight.pistons
www.WebAccessStrategies.com


> -----Original Message-----
> From: <EMAIL REMOVED> [mailto:webaim-forum-
> <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Aaron Cannon
> Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 10:30 AM
> To: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> Subject: [WebAIM] accessibility without testing?
>
> Hi all.
>
> It has always been my understanding that in order to consistently create
> accessible pages, particularly pages which are accessible to screen reader
> users, it is necessary to conduct testing with assistive technology. I.E.
> before you can say for sure something is accessible, someone has to go
> check. Is this view accurate? Is there a more automated way of ensuring
> accessibility that I'm unaware of?
>
> I know that there have been some products marketed to be able to do so,
> but I was under the impression that they were just snake oil. I also know
> of a couple products, which are quite good at identifying potential
> problem areas, but that they can't possibly identify them all, nor are
> they immune to false-positives.
>
> Any information would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Aaron Cannon
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended
> recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any
> unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you
> are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email
> and destroy all copies of the original message.
>