RE: [WSG] Rant about Bobby
Dear Group, Ive come to use Bobby for one reason and that is insuring that all images have alt tags. I manage a website or at least try to where too many people have the ability to add content and unfortunately other items to our website. In my opinion the comments pages that come up are too cumbersome and many comments do not address issues on my page but possible issues or they are incorrect. It has also called me on a linking issue where one word out of three was the same to describe two different links and told me I shouldnt use the same description to describe different links. Nancy Johnson -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marc Greenstock Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 11:41 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [WSG] Rant about Bobby
Re: [WSG] Rant about Bobby
Hello, Just as there are ways to create hackfree markup and css, there are ways to satisfy Bobby. Usually by the time one has done it, one has come up with a better page. Using Bobby has probably been the one thing that helped me to learn to appreciate the value of well structured markup. I learned more about standards and accessibility there than I can ever expect to here. In fact, I would have to say that I much prefer Bobby, with its tight-lipped, pitiless scrutiny. At least one can expect some kind of a clue as to which direction to turn. Whatsmore, if one disagrees with Bobby, one may write to Watchfire and raise one's objections. The folks there actually DO reply. I know this from experience. What may one come to expect from the WSG list? http://www.fuckinggoogleit.com. Real cute. Cheers, Roy Nancy Johnson wrote: Dear Group, I've come to use Bobby for one reason and that is insuring that all images have alt tags. I manage a website or at least try to where too many people have the ability to add content and unfortunately other items to our website. In my opinion the comments pages that come up are too cumbersome and many comments do not address issues on my page but possible issues or they are incorrect. It has also called me on a linking issue where one word out of three was the same to describe two different links and told me I shouldn't use the same description to describe different links. Nancy Johnson * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
[WSG] Rant about Bobby
Don't mind me I just want to rant about Automatic Accessibility checkers such as bobby. Bobbycontradicts it's self all the way through the WAI test, failing everything it THINKS is wrong. Let me give youa few examples... Problem: Do not use the same link phrase more than once when the links point to different URLS. Contradiction 1: Is there a site map or table of contents... Contradiction 2: Is there a clear, consistent navigation structure? Ok this seems straight forward right, don't have "read more" links all over the page, keep every thing concise as to explain what the user will be clicking on. Sure works well in principle, but what about when you want a site map? If you follow checkpoint 13.4 then you should keep a navigation all through out the site, right? Well Bobby doesn't think so... Bobby doesn't like links named the same, even though those links that are named the same go to the same place. Bobby kicks and screams all the way down the site map. Now I know I can quick to point blame, but I'm not sure if this is a fault of Bobby or an oversight with the WCAG. My initial thought would be Bobby is to blame, but then again it's just following orders, doing explicitly what WCAG says and not bothering to read in-between the lines. Anyway thanks for putting up with my rant. Have a nice day ;)
