I use Firefox's Web Developer's Toolbar Extension which has multiple
validators including one for section 508 and one for WAI.  I recommend it.

Shane
Lubbock, TX

> Thanks Shane. I'll give it a look - Getting specific books from local
> bookstores here (in the philipines) can be a real challenge, but I'll see
> if
> I can source the one you've recommended.
>
> After you do a site (or during) do you "validate" your code against one of
> these Accessibility web sites I mentioned?
>
> Cole
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Shane Shepherd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 10:02 PM
> Subject: Re: [WSG] Automated accessibility testers
>
>
>> Cole,
>>
>> This is my first time to reply to anything on the list, so I hope I am
>> doing it correctly:)
>>
>> I recommend "Constructing Accessible Web Sites" published by glasshaus.
>> This book focuses on the Section 508 Standards and the WAI, but filters
>> all the legalese.  It also gives code examples and application examples.
>> I'm about half-way through it right now, and it has made a huge
>> difference
>> in the way I write code.
>>
>> Shane
>> Lubbock, TX
>>
>> > I've never tried testing my code for accessibility before but I'm
> becoming
>> > more interested in the topic. After some web-research, I've found a
>> > mountian of information/guidelines/priority checkpoints (etc., etc.)
>> to
>> > wade through and consider. My eyes are glazing over.
>> >
>> > ------------------------------------
>> >
>> > First question: Is there a site anywhere that can tell me (clearly and
>> > concisely) something like:
>> >
>> > To achieve section 508 compliance you have to: 1) do this, 2) do that,
> 3)
>> > do the other thing.
>> >
>> > Most of the stuff I've seen is very heavy on reasons, but somewhat
>> light
>> > on the "you just need to include this, in this way" type of
>> information.
>> >
>> > ----------------------------------
>> >
>> > Second question:
>> >
>> > Just as a test, I ran one of my pages through a site called the
>> Cynthia
>> > Says Portal (http://www.contentquality.com/Default.asp)
>> >
>> > According to the Section 508 report option (as well as the WCAG -
> Priority
>> > 1,2,3 option) the pages I submitted to the validator all "passed"
>> > according to the validator's result list.
>> >
>> > Well, that made me smile - but also wonder at the same time.
>> >
>> > Are these kind of sites a reliable way to verfiy code for
>> Accessibility
>> > for Section 508 and/or WCAG Checkpoints?
>> >
>> > Like, if a client were to say to me "Is the site 508 compliant?" can I
>> > say, "well, yeah, the Cynthia Says portal reported that it was. Good
>> > enough for me."
>> >
>> > Well, IS THAT GOOD ENOUGH?
>> >
>> > Is there a better on-line validator I should be running my pages
>> through
>> > vs Cynthia Says? Since I've become interested in this issue , I want
>> to
>> > start off on the right foot in order to make sure these automated,
>> > web-based results are telling me what I need to hear.
>> >
>> > Bottom line is that I guess it'ss hard for me to believed that I've
>> > "aced-it" on the first time out.
>> >
>> > Any and all input greatly appreciated.
>> >
>> > Cole Kuryakin
>> > Subic Bay, Philippines
>> >
>>
>> ******************************************************
>> The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/
>>
>>  See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>>  for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
>> ******************************************************
>>
>>
>
>
> ******************************************************
> The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/
>
>  See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>  for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> ******************************************************
>
>

******************************************************
The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/

 See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
******************************************************

Reply via email to