After asking everyone not to hijack a topic, it seems I have done the same. Apologies all (especially Mike).
Rev Bob, I'd be very careful about Bobby. This has been discussed on-list a few times, but here is a recap: There are other accessibility tools that have better reputations than Bobby now. Bobby has received growing criticism over the last few years - here is an example: http://www.evolt.org/article/Why_Bobby_Approved_is_not_Enough/4090/9278/inde x.html?format=print Here are some other online accessibility tools: WAVE http://wave.webaim.org/index.jsp UsableNet: http://www.usablenet.com/ Ask Alice: http://askalice.ssbtechnologies.com:8080/askalice/index.html Colour Contrast Analyser: http://www.juicystudio.com/services/colourcontrast.asp 'cynthiasays' http://www.cynthiasays.com Accessify tools and wizards http://www.accessify.com/tools-and-wizards/default.asp Checklist of Checkpoints for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0: http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/full-checklist.html Russ > Yes, I definitely think my brain was stretched thin trying to get > around that one. Let's try again. While I don't personally agree > that you can ignore Bobby's advice, I can see how some people could > agree, and I don't want to have that fight here. Indeed, I respect > their opinions. However, a developer who doesn't at least *look* at > what Bobby says hasn't done the job, imho. ***************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *****************************************************
