Have to agree with Vlad. XStandard rocks! Johan
> ------------Original Message------------ > From: Vlad Alexander (XStandard) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Fri, Dec-10-2004 3:31 PM > Subject: Re: [WSG CMS] General CMS consensus > > Hi Mark, > > >>Guys What are the accessibility issues??? Please tell me. > I had a quick looks and here are just a few things that stand-out: > > 1. Form fields don't have a <label> > > 2. Some decorative images have alt text. For example > http://www.blacktown.nsw.gov.au/blacktown/pics/spacer.gif > ..has alt="dms stats recording image" > Alternate text for decorative images should be written as: alt="" > > 3. There is a bit too much reliance on JavaScript - I disabled active > scripting in IE and the menu bar displayed incorrectly. > > However, the biggest obstacle to accessibility, in my opinion, is > non-validating markup. You are relying on the user-agent's ability to > correctly parse markup that is incorrectly structure/nested/authored. Most > user agents will do an okay job but why leave something as import as > markup to interpretation and parsing ability of user agents. If you write > markup to spec, then you know there isn't going to be any problems. > > Mark, a few replies to your post have mentioned the need for an XHTML > editor. I hope you will consider XStandard. XStandard is a > standards-compliant XHTML (Strict or 1.1) WYSIWYG editor for CMS. Here is an > article > on what the editor does to make sure content authored is accessible and > standards-compliant: > > http://xstandard.com/wysiwyg/ > > Regards, > -Vlad > XStandard Development Team > http://xstandard.com > > > ********************************************************* > The CMS discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > ********************************************************* > > > ********************************************************* The CMS discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *********************************************************
