E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 3 (In chronological order)

From: Debbie Charles
Date: Mon, Dec 19 2005 1:40PM
Subject: Accessibility software
No previous message | Next message →

Hi,

I was wondering if any of you are using site licensed packages to check
sites for accessibility. I am in SC at a state university, and our state
has mandated Section 508 standards effective later next year. We are
currently looking at packages available, such as Watchfire. We have
hundreds of staff and faculty members publishing sites campus-wide that
will be subject to the standard. Most are not trained developers (and even
those who are have not consistently considered accessibility), but rather
have the responsibility because they were interested in it and enjoyed it
or other less happy reasons. :)

Watchfire (site license), for example, will allow unlimited checks by large
numbers of people (they've confirmed 100 people can run a check at the same
time). The report can capture code so the user knows where to look for the
problem and has a 'help' that will show code examples, etc. I realize there
are many things accessibility software cannot check for, but we have over
500,000 pages in our site, and a staff of 6 who are available to assist in
correcting issues. We have developed a comprehensive plan for training,
etc., but feel a tool like this can let those webmasters who are fairly
comfortable with code, etc. begin to work toward compliance.

Many of the sites will require little more than adding alternate text, but
most of our audience doesn't even know what that is. We have limited
resources (me) to help individuals determine the accessibility of their
site, and we want them to be able to do a check on their site, note the
problems, make a plan to transition, attend training specific to their
problems, fix their problems (as many as possible) on their own as our
(very limited number of people) address mission critical sites.

I would really like a critique of any commercial packages if anyone has any
experience with them. Thanks for any suggestions!

Debbie

Debbie Charles
Educational Technology Services
864.650.3995

From: Robinson, Norman B - Washington, DC
Date: Mon, Dec 19 2005 3:00PM
Subject: RE: Accessibility software
← Previous message | Next message →

Debbie,

My organization has access to any number of commercial tools.
The automated tool approach doesn't really work all that well.

What seems to work best is to have a goal based checklist for
the content creators (e.g.,
http://www.usps.com/cpim/ftp/hand/as508a/508a_c6.html#508hdr92) and to
allow them VISUAL preview instead of only code-based inspection. The
only automated inspection I suggest requiring is a W3C style validator
to eliminate some of the standardization issues, but that can be
burdensome on users (who debatably shouldn't be posting official web
pages unless they understand the basic mechanics and impact of
failures).

I've found Firefox (http://www.mozilla.com/) with the Web
Developer add-on
(https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php?application=firefox&
category=Developer%20Tools&numpg=10&id=60) to be the most useful for end
users.

A few other extensions such as Table Inspector
(https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php?application=firefox&
category=Developer%20Tools&numpg=10&id=464), a screen reader emulator
(https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php?application=firefox&
category=Developer%20Tools&numpg=10&id=402) and easy to identify
colorful source code
(https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php?application=firefox&
category=Developer%20Tools&numpg=10&id=655) makes it easy for them to
_visually_ discern the issues.

I mainly recommend these as I've also found many users want to
install the same tools at home and learn the development skills
necessary on their own time. The cost of these tools is nothing, which
allows them to practice and share beyond the usefulness of a commercial
tool. I'm not an open source zealot, but these tools _work_. There is
also AIS Toolbar available for Internet Explorer, but I find the Firefox
approach to be better due to the quality of the extensions, the number
of additional extensions, and the practice that most of my users that
aren't web developers keep Firefox dedicated to a development
configuration.

Finally, a tool to find & replace or traverse the entire file
structure of a web site file by file can be very useful. Mostly for the
users that have web administration responsibilities or who have to
remediate several hundred web pages. It allows them to search for
"<Table" and then look for the absence of summary tags for instance.
There are many shareware programs on Windows and other commandline tools
that do this easily on Linux or OS X. I use WinMerge and "Advanced Find
& Replace" on Windows.

Regards,


Norman B. Robinson

From: Lori Bailey
Date: Tue, Dec 20 2005 1:40PM
Subject: Accessibility software
← Previous message | No next message

Debbie,

We considered using Watchfire when I was at Ohio State Univ, but found that most users had difficulty interpreting the report. In particular, the report, at that time, did not allow pages to be sorted by error (e.g. show me all pages that have "Alternative Text" missing on images). And the Help seemed to only make sense to users after some introductory training on accessibility issues. I did numerous reviews for different departments and programs, and provided a copy of the Watchfire report with the my own customized report, but many users told me they didn't understand what the report was saying and used my review report almost exclusively.

As a result, OSU decided to make the tool available to administrators of large sites, but focused on providing a check list of errors (as was already suggested), an implementation plan based on page priority, and free training and on-demand site reviews. We implemented a reporting process to allow webmasters to self-assess and report their progress in coming into compliance -- that seemed to be the best tool to help us focus our resources. Those who reported little or no progress after year one get focused attention. Although, I left the university after our first year of implementation -- for a new position, not because of any problems with the system -- it seemed to be proving effective. You can see much of what was built on the web site: OSU Web Accessibility Center: www.wac.ohio-state.edu.

Best,

Lori

__________
Lori Bailey
Director of Informational and Instructional Design
College of Education, Temple University
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =

Subject: [WebAIM] Accessibility software Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 15:14:47 -0500 To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = From: "Debbie Charles" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >

Watchfire (site license), for example, will allow unlimited checks by
large numbers of people (they've confirmed 100 people can run a check at the
same time). The report can capture code so the user knows where to look for the problem and has a 'help' that will show code examples, etc.

___
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com