W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org > January 2002

Tools Review

From: Chris Ridpath <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 14:55:12 -0500
Message-ID: <2ee201c19f90$dfde9d60$b040968e@wilddog>
To: "WAI ER IG List" <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>
Cc: "Laurie Harrison" <laurie.harrison@utoronto.ca>
The ATRC, University of Toronto is undertaking a review and comparison of
accessibility evaluation and repair tools currently on the market. In
preparation for this study, we are conducting a literature review of
existing work related to evaluation and repair tools specifically designed
to address web accessibility issues.

While the ER web site and list serve archives provide valuable resources, we
would like to ensure that we have made a thorough inquiry. The only
published review we have noted is the GCN article published in August 2001:
http://www.gcn.com/20_23/s508/16783-1.html  If anyone has information on
additional studies or literature, could you please suggest URLs or journal

The review we are undertaking will utilize the Access Tool Reviewer.  Using
the comprehensive set of test files provided by the Access Tool Reviewer
(ATR) we will track the ability of various products to handle the specific
accessibility issue within each file.  The intention is to compare current
standalone products on the market, such as:

 A-Prompt Tool Kit (http://www.aprompt.ca)
 InSight and InFocus (http://www.ssbtechnologies.com/index.php)
 AccVerify and AccRepair  (http://www.hisoftware.com/access/Index.html )
 Page Screamer (http://crunchy.com/tools/index.html)
 RetroAccess (http://www.retroaccess.com)
Bobby downloadable
Other tools as well

Results of this comparison will be presented at the CSUN 2002 conference.

Anyone interested in helping with the survey is invited to contact me or
Laurie Harrison (laurie.harrison@utoronto.ca).

Received on Thursday, 17 January 2002 14:55:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:01:33 UTC