E-mail List Archives
Thread: Test Cases for Evaluating Accessibility Testing Software?
Number of posts in this thread: 6 (In chronological order)
From: Robert Fentress
Date: Mon, Feb 01 2016 1:33PM
Subject: Test Cases for Evaluating Accessibility Testing Software?
No previous message | Next message →
Hello, all.
Is anyone aware of a webpage or series of web pages that could be used as
test cases for objectively evaluating different accessibility testing
software. They would be designed to trigger specific warnings or errors
based on WCAG criteria. Ideally, these test cases would be something that
was produced by a standards-making body like the Web Accessibility
Initiative, rather than something provided by a vendor, which would, of
course, be of less value.
Also, if anyone knows of a list of different features that accessibility
testing suites might include, that would be helpful to in making a
comparison matrix.
Thanks.
Best,
Rob
--
Robert Fentress
Senior Accessibility Solutions Designer
540.231.1255
Technology-enhanced Learning & Online Strategies
Assistive Technologies
1180 Torgersen Hall
620 Drillfield Drive (0434)
Blacksburg, Virginia 24061
From: Joseph Sherman
Date: Mon, Feb 01 2016 1:42PM
Subject: Re: Test Cases for Evaluating Accessibility Testing Software?
← Previous message | Next message →
Something like these?
https://www.w3.org/WAI/demos/bad/Overview.html
http://www.mothereffingtoolconfuser.com/
Joseph
From: Shadi Abou-Zahra
Date: Tue, Feb 02 2016 7:26AM
Subject: Re: Test Cases for Evaluating Accessibility Testing Software?
← Previous message | Next message →
Hi Robert,
W3C/WAI tried to create such test cases a while ago but unfortunately
there was little involvement back then. Maybe this will be picked up
again if there is sufficient interest:
- https://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/tests/
Best,
Shadi
On 1.2.2016 21:33, Robert Fentress wrote:
> Hello, all.
>
> Is anyone aware of a webpage or series of web pages that could be used as
> test cases for objectively evaluating different accessibility testing
> software. They would be designed to trigger specific warnings or errors
> based on WCAG criteria. Ideally, these test cases would be something that
> was produced by a standards-making body like the Web Accessibility
> Initiative, rather than something provided by a vendor, which would, of
> course, be of less value.
>
> Also, if anyone knows of a list of different features that accessibility
> testing suites might include, that would be helpful to in making a
> comparison matrix.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Best,
> Rob
>
>
--
Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/
Activity Lead, WAI International Program Office
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
From: Guy Hickling
Date: Tue, Feb 02 2016 7:31AM
Subject: Re: Test Cases for Evaluating Accessibility Testing Software?
← Previous message | Next message →
And here is another one, which I found just yesterday as it happens, from
Pennsylvania State University, that they did for testing the test tools:
http://accessibility.psu.edu/testing/testingtools/testbadpage/
And for the list you are asking for, of features for accessibility testing,
I'm currently building a list myself. It's very much work in progress and
only half finished, but you can see it at:
http://www.enigmaticweb.com/index.php/blog/accessibilityChecklist
Regards,
Guy Hickling
From: Robert Fentress
Date: Tue, Feb 02 2016 8:38AM
Subject: Re: Test Cases for Evaluating Accessibility Testing Software?
← Previous message | Next message →
Thanks, all. That's a start.
One thing I ran across is the French Standard, Référentiel Général
d'Accessibilité pour les Administrations or RGAA (
https://references.modernisation.gouv.fr/rgaa-3-0). SSB BART has a quick
article about it here:
http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog/french-accessibility-requirements/
The main thing I noticed is this standard is based on WCAG 2.0 and includes*
"unit tests that define how to determine compliance with each requirement"*.
It looks like the Tanaguru accessibility testing suite (
https://github.com/Tanaguru/Tanaguru) is based on this standard. So I
think a good non-example site would use those unit tests to trigger
failures or notifications that manual checks are needed. Since that is a
government standard based on WCAG 2.0, that would serve as an objective
reference for evaluating accessibility testing tools.
What do you think? Does that make sense?
Best,
Rob
On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Guy Hickling < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>
> And here is another one, which I found just yesterday as it happens, from
> Pennsylvania State University, that they did for testing the test tools:
>
> http://accessibility.psu.edu/testing/testingtools/testbadpage/
>
> And for the list you are asking for, of features for accessibility
testing,
> I'm currently building a list myself. It's very much work in progress and
> only half finished, but you can see it at:
> http://www.enigmaticweb.com/index.php/blog/accessibilityChecklist
>
> Regards,
> Guy Hickling
> > > > --
Robert Fentress
Senior Accessibility Solutions Designer
540.231.1255
Technology-enhanced Learning & Online Strategies
Assistive Technologies
1180 Torgersen Hall
620 Drillfield Drive (0434)
Blacksburg, Virginia 24061
From: Robert Fentress
Date: Tue, Feb 02 2016 9:01AM
Subject: Re: Test Cases for Evaluating Accessibility Testing Software?
← Previous message | No next message
This looks interesting, though I'd really like it if there was just one big
page that triggered all the errors.
http://www.kbaccess.org/?lang=en
On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 10:38 AM, Robert Fentress < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Thanks, all. That's a start.
>
> One thing I ran across is the French Standard, Référentiel Général
> d'Accessibilité pour les Administrations or RGAA (
> https://references.modernisation.gouv.fr/rgaa-3-0). SSB BART has a quick
> article about it here:
> http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog/french-accessibility-requirements/
>
> The main thing I noticed is this standard is based on WCAG 2.0 and includes*
> "unit tests that define how to determine compliance with each requirement"*.
> It looks like the Tanaguru accessibility testing suite (
> https://github.com/Tanaguru/Tanaguru) is based on this standard. So I
> think a good non-example site would use those unit tests to trigger
> failures or notifications that manual checks are needed. Since that is a
> government standard based on WCAG 2.0, that would serve as an objective
> reference for evaluating accessibility testing tools.
>
> What do you think? Does that make sense?
>
> Best,
> Rob
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Guy Hickling < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> wrote:
> >
> > And here is another one, which I found just yesterday as it happens, from
> > Pennsylvania State University, that they did for testing the test tools:
> >
> > http://accessibility.psu.edu/testing/testingtools/testbadpage/
> >
> > And for the list you are asking for, of features for accessibility
> testing,
> > I'm currently building a list myself. It's very much work in progress and
> > only half finished, but you can see it at:
> > http://www.enigmaticweb.com/index.php/blog/accessibilityChecklist
> >
> > Regards,
> > Guy Hickling
> > > > > > > > >
>
>
>
> --
> Robert Fentress
> Senior Accessibility Solutions Designer
> 540.231.1255
>
> Technology-enhanced Learning & Online Strategies
> Assistive Technologies
> 1180 Torgersen Hall
> 620 Drillfield Drive (0434)
> Blacksburg, Virginia 24061
>
--
Robert Fentress
Senior Accessibility Solutions Designer
540.231.1255
Technology-enhanced Learning & Online Strategies
Assistive Technologies
1180 Torgersen Hall
620 Drillfield Drive (0434)
Blacksburg, Virginia 24061