E-mail List Archives
From: John Foliot - bytown internet
Date: Sep 10, 2002 7:31AM
- Next message: Paul Bohman: "RE: Table headers not behaving"
- Previous message: Timothy J. Luoma: "Re: fonts in css"
- Next message in Thread: Holly Marie: "Re: Bobby"
- Previous message in Thread: Mark Rew: "Re: Bobby [and asp]"
- View all messages in this Thread
I personally have a concern with the Bobby icon as any means of conveying
Web pages are generally organic things... they change and are modified over
time. Yet most developers (honest now - you too) don't ALWAYs verify their
modifications... time is precious, we're under deadlines, it's Friday
afternoon at 5:15, etc., etc. Having a little icon down at the bottom of
the page lulls us into a false sense of security. In the past week alone
I've seen at least 6 pages with the Bobby Icon (and W3C HTML validation
icon) which did not qualify. Was the developer deliberately seeking to
mislead? I doubt it, but none-the-less it was "false advertising".
Until such time as Bobby (or another, equivelant application) can
dynamically parse a document and append a "stamp of approval" on ONLY
compliant pages, I take the inclusion of the icon with a huge grain of salt.
And since the "accessibility" of a site cannot be judged via mechanical
tests alone I don't think we'll ever see that day.
Don't get me wrong... stiving for and advocating accessible web sites
(especially in the private sector) is an admirable and forward thinking
position and it should be recognized appropriately, but is the Bobby icon
the right way to go? Perhaps an "Accessibility Matters" icon, with a link
to appropriate content would better serve the the common good. It would
convey that the developer was concerned about the site's accessibility, that
they worked hard at ensuring the site was accessibile, and if a user
discovered an issue that the developer would appreciate hearing about it so
that it might be corrected.
Paul, perhaps this would be a great initiative for WebAIM?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Rew [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ]
> Sent: September 10, 2002 9:19 AM
> To: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> Subject: Re: Bobby [and asp]
> US Federal managers who want to see a Bobby Approved graphic on
> their sites
> are missing the point. They should have internal certification
> that their web
> sites are compliant with the Section 508 1197.22 standards. It is the
> responsibility of the US Government Agencies to ensure the Section 508
> compliance. This means that the Agency needs to include
> corresponding Section
> 508 standards in the requirements of the contract.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Leo Smith" < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> To: < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 9:05 AM
> Subject: Re: Bobby [and asp]
> > <snip>
> > I know that there are some issues withBobby = and that=20 it
> > cannot be the only accessibility tool used on a site, but it seems to
> > = me that=20 it is one of the most recognizable and that the US
> > government, for whom = I do=20 some work, would like to see a
> > "Bobby Approved" graphic on any site that = they=20 have an
> > interest in developing.
> > </snip>
> > <response>
> > It seems that Bobby is becoming somewhat a stamp of approval
> > for many sites out there that are striving for accessibility, and also
> > perhaps as a way of saying to the world that is what you have
> > done (and why wouldn't you want to?).
> > My only concern, and one that others on this list have voiced, is
> > the validity and reliability of Bobby as a testing tool. I personally
> > have found Bobby to contain at least one (fairly major) error, and
> > to not be update with all or new technniques of coding for
> > accessibility.
> > I am wondering if it would be worth some time and effort for us
> > to begin suggesting ways that Bobby can be improved to the folks
> > that develop it - maybe some of you already have, and I would be
> > interested to hear about it.
> > Leo.
> > </response>
> > Leo Smith
> > Web Designer/Developer
> > USM Office of Publications and Marketing
> > University of Southern Maine
> > 207-780-4774
> > ----
> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
> > visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
> visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,