hi James,
These articles might be of some help:
A Review of Free, Online Accessibility Tools
http://www.webaim.org/techniques/articles/freetools/
Do-It-Yourself Accessibility
http://www.sitepoint.com/article/yourself-accessibility/2
cheers
Iza
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 24/06/04 15:37
Hi - does
: www.accessibility1st.com.au
Blog: www.accessibility1st.com.au/journal/
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of James Cowperthwaite
Sent: Thursday, 24 June 2004 3:37 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [WSG] Accessability testing
Hi - does anyone still use Bobby these days
Thanks for the responses!
Has anyone played with Usablenet? Opinions?
Thanks
James
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting
I think there is a problem inherent in using these tools.
HTML validators work because they check a document against a 'machine
readable' set of grammars. Accessibility tools can't do this. What they
do is look at a site based on a set of guidelines. However these
guidelines are open to
Hi - does anyone still use Bobby these days?
I ask because we really have only used:
Cynthia Says - Web Content Accessibility Report
(http://www.contentquality.com/)
On a site we are developing we pass all Checklist items up to and
including Priority 3 Verification with Cynthia, however our
