Awesome!  Thanks for that link!

Shane
Lubbock, TX

> http://www.diveintoaccessibility.org/
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Rowena Padel
> Sent: 13 April 2005 16:49
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: [WSG] Automated accessibility testers
>
>
>
> Hi Cole
>
> I really can't remember where I got it, but I have a pdf file called Dive
> into Accessibility that is freely distributable under a GNU Free
> Documentation license. I found it a brilliant description of the what, why
> and how of accessibility. If you like I will send you a copy privately.
>
> Rowena
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   _____
>
>
> From: Cole Kuryakin - x7m [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 13 April 2005 13:02
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [WSG] Automated accessibility testers
>
>
>
> 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
******************************************************

Reply via email to