W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2002

Re: Manual validation

From: Nick Kew <nick@webthing.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2002 23:17:30 +0100 (BST)
To: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0209222301140.1297-100000@jarl.webthing.com>

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
Received on Sunday, 22 September 2002 18:17:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:06 GMT