Re: Manual validation

On Sun, 22 Sep 2002, David Woolley wrote:

> There are two issues here. One is the need for manual validation,
> and the other who should do it.

And the third is what resources are available to do it.  If you have
a blind person, do you equip them with expensive top-of-the-range kit
that can do things like "accessible" flash, or something affordable to
real-life users?

> It is impossible to automatically validate for accessibility, so 
> manual validation is always needed.

A sweeping generalisation:-)

> People with disabilities are likely to understand specific issues
> better than those without.

This is true, particularly where you are presenting complex information.
But those of us who don't have representatives from a broad range of
disability groups amongst our colleagues have to make do with
second-best.  IMO a pretty good target is a three-level approach:

(1) Automatic testing with Site Valet
(2) Does it work as linearised text - e.g. view in in Lynx
(3) Provide a prominent and accessible feedback option for people
    to raise any issues that remain in spite of your best efforts.
    Make sure someone is tasked with dealing with such feedback!

-- 
Nick Kew