Mark I am sure some of the validation problems must be in the templates, for example: <html lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml";>
Just view source in FireFox 1.0 and Tidy will show 1 error / 61 warnings for the home page. Most I suspect due to confusion between doctype specified and markup used. regards Johan > ------------Original Message------------ > From: Mark Stanton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Fri, Dec-10-2004 7:35 PM > Subject: Re: [WSG CMS] General CMS consensus > > Thanks Vlad > > > 1. Form fields don't have a <label> > > True and that is my responsibility (or lack thereof....) > > > > 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="" > > I know, but there is nothing that I can do about that at the moment - > its another areas that is locked off by the CMS. > > > > 3. There is a bit too much reliance on JavaScript - I disabled active > scripting in IE and the menu bar displayed incorrectly. > > A lot of time and effort has gone into making sure that navigation > does work without javascript. If you have javascript off and CSS on, > you get problems. But without javascript and without CSS the menus are > still accessible. > > > > 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. > > Yes I agree - validation is important. There are three aspects to the > site's content: > - CMS generated output > - Author provided content > - Template layout code > > I'm responsible for the last one, but every validation error on the > page is from one of the first two sources. > > > > 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: > > I agree. The editor in Shado is built in and I am stuct with it at the > moment. There are somethings it does very well, but other things it > does quite poorly. Maybe you should approach Straker, the makers of > Shado about this? Contact me off list if you need contact details. > > Thanks for your post mate - I appreciate the feedback. > > -- > Mark Stanton > Gruden Pty Ltd > http://www.gruden.com > ********************************************************* > The CMS discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > ********************************************************* > > > ********************************************************* The CMS discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *********************************************************
