E-mail List Archives

Re: Web application testing

for

From: Jim Homme
Date: Aug 29, 2016 10:46AM


Hi Vinessa,
Thanks very much for this info.

Jim


=========Jim Homme,
Accessibility Consultant,
Bender HighTest Accessibility Team
Bender Consulting Services, Inc.,
412-787-8567,
<EMAIL REMOVED>
http://www.benderconsult.com/our%20services/hightest-accessible-technology-solutions
E+R=O

-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Preast, Vanessa
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2016 11:36 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Web application testing

Hi Jim,

Sorry for the delayed response.

Honestly, I haven't used it enough yet to give you a thorough analysis. I have been using it as a back-up after using the WAVE tool to make sure that the WAVE tool didn't miss anything. It does pick up on stuff in a different way than the WAVE tool does, but I have to check the results to see if they are false positives. I like that it gives usability information. It does not give the results in the context of a screenshot, it gives the line number for the code and a snippet of the code when it identifies errors or warnings. I wish it would give the information in the context of the page layout so I could more easily confirm the content. (I think this is on their roadmap for future versions) We got it to do multi-page scans, but I haven't really done many of those yet....

Overall, it is OK for the price (<$300 for academic institutions), especially since it works in password-protected areas and doesn't need special servers or programming, unlike other multi-page checkers of similar price. They do offer a 30-day trial for the full-version of the software, so you should be able to try it out.

I can write you back again once I've used it more thoroughly.

Hope it helps

Best,
Vanessa

-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Jim Homme
Sent: Saturday, August 13, 2016 1:33 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Web application testing

Hi Vanessa,
How do you like the reports from PowerMapper?

Thanks.

Jim


=========Jim Homme,
Accessibility Consultant,
Bender HighTest Accessibility Team
Bender Consulting Services, Inc.,
412-787-8567,
<EMAIL REMOVED>
http://www.benderconsult.com/our%20services/hightest-accessible-technology-solutions
E+R=O

-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Preast, Vanessa
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2016 10:04 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Web application testing

I've used the following for different reasons. Sometimes I have to check a site that doesn't play well with Chrome or Firefox or IE, so I switch to a different checker depending on needs. Sometimes I'm recommending checkers for others who have certain preferences or system set-ups.

WAVE is my usual go-to tool, with AInspector as second for page-by-page checking. Sometimes WAVE chokes up on our LMS, so I might then see what results the other tools can tell me. I've got a copy of SortSite Desktop by PowerMapper, and will use that for a quick multi-page scan for accessibility and usability issues.

Chrome plugins:
WAVE chrome plugin (https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/wave-evaluation-tool/jbbplnpkjmmeebjpijfedlgcdilocofh?hl=en)
aXe chrome plugin (https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/axe/lhdoppojpmngadmnindnejefpokejbdd?hl=en)
Web Developer chrome plugin to assist manual check (https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/web-developer/bfbameneiokkgbdmiekhjnmfkcnldhhm?hl=en)
Accessibility Developer Tools chrome plugin (https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/accessibility-developer-t/fpkknkljclfencbdbgkenhalefipecmb?hl=en)

Firefox Add-ons:
AInspector Sidebar (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/ainspector-sidebar/)
aXe DevTools (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/axe-devtools/?src=api)
Fangs Screen Reader Emulator (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/fangs-screen-reader-emulator/) - writes out what a screen reader would read


Colour Contrast Analyser (CCA) | The Paciello Group (https://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/contrastanalyser/) nice desktop tool to check color contrast on anything on the desktop including contents in a browser, PowerPoints, etc...

SBF Color Contrast Checker / Analyzer includes both HEX and RGB (http://www.sbwfc.co.kr/ColorChecker/)

Screenreader - NVDA (http://www.nvaccess.org/)

Readability: http://www.hemingwayapp.com/ and MSWord readability scores


-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Jim Homme
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2016 7:51 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Web application testing

Hi,
What automation tools do you use?

Jim


=========Jim Homme,
Accessibility Consultant,
Bender HighTest Accessibility Team
Bender Consulting Services, Inc.,
412-787-8567,
<EMAIL REMOVED>
http://www.benderconsult.com/our%20services/hightest-accessible-technology-solutions
E+R=O

-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Tim Harshbarger
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2016 8:41 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Web application testing

I would strongly advocate that you start with automated testing before you even bother with doing any type of screen reader testing.

I think the key is just to ensure that the only tests you automate are always correct. If it says there is a defect, it should always be a defect. That simplifies things a great deal.

While automated testing won't catch everything that manual testing will, it is faster and cheaper to do.

Also, if you are working with other developers, it is a lot easier to teach them how to use the automated tool and its results.

Personally, I think it is essential to test with screen readers if you want to produce high quality user interfaces. However, testing with a screen reader adds a lot more complexity.

To test well with a screen reader, you need to know how to operate it and understand what kind of information it is going to convey if everything is working correctly. One of the tricky parts comes when you run into defects. Most of the time, it is fairly easy to determine if the defect is related to application code. Other times, it is difficult to figure out if the problem is the application code, the browser, or the screen reader.

My suggestion would be to check the code frequently with automated testing and then follow up with screen reader testing less frequently.

Thanks,
Tim



-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of sucharu
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2016 12:05 AM
To: 'WebAIM Discussion List' < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Web applicationtesting

Hi,
As per my understanding, JAWS and NVDA behavior differently because of two facts 1. JAWS make some guess work in some situations like unlabeled forms 2. ARIA support is at different levels in both screen- readers So, I think JAWS is likely to skip the errors easily catchable by freely available automated accessibility testing tools like AXE, a- inspector.
So, Is to test with automated tools first and then with JAWS, a better approach?
-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Sean Murphy
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2016 9:39 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Web applicationtesting

Sorry, you should test NVDA and Jaws on both of those browsers.

NvDA has been enhanced to work better with Firefox then IE. Jaws works better with IE and does work extremely well with Firefox.


> On 1 Aug 2016, at 9:22 PM, Jamous, JP < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
> Sucharu,
>
> As suggested, but here is a more solid approach.
>
> JAWS with Internet Explorer
> NVDA with FireFox
> VoiceOver with Safari on Mac, iPad and iPhone
>
> If you cover the above, you can be in a great shape.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On
> Behalf Of sucharu
> Sent: Monday, August 01, 2016 5:46 AM
> To: 'WebAIM Discussion List' < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Web applicationtesting
>
> Dear listmembers,
> Can someone provide link to any resource about "screen- reader and browser combination: potential first choice"
> Best,
> Sucharu
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On
> Behalf Of surbhi Mudgal
> Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2016 3:45 PM
> To: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Web applicationtesting
>
> Hi all,
> Good day.
>
> Thank you so much for the valuable responses.
>
> Thanks & regards,
> surbhi Mudgal.
>
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 10:02 AM, surbhi Mudgal
> < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>>
>> Good Day.
>>
>>
>>
>> Looking for a very simple confirmation on testing a web page or web
>> application. Would just like to know if there is any basic standard
>> rule to test using different screen readers ( JAWS, NVDA, VOICE
>> OVER) or it depends up on the user comfort.
>>
>>
>>
>> And if any particular procedure to be followed can anyone please help
>> me understand the same.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks & Regards,
>>
>> Surbhi Mudgal.
>>
> > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> >
> > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> > > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
>