W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2011

RE: Accessible content management system

From: Cheryl D Wise <cdwise@wiserways.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2011 08:50:18 -0600
To: 'Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo' <coordina@sidar.org>, <isforums@manx.net>
Cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <031e01cc537e$ff461730$fdd24590$@wiserways.com>
I was referring to an earlier comment in this thread about how some CMS or
another wouldn’t "validate" to XHTML Strict and the corresponding inference
that its failure to do so make it inaccessible. In my experience when
someone uses the term "validate" they are referring to automated checked
which I agree is not sufficient.

Cheryl D Wise
http://by-expression.com
http://expressionwebforum.com 
http://wiserways.com
twitter: cdwise


-----Original Message-----
From: Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo 

I can't agree with the idea that "you can have a site that validates
perfectly and still be completely unusable". I can't agree with the people
that think that "validate" mean pass an automatic test.

The validation must be manual with the help of 2 tools. 

But only with some users validation, supervised by an accessibility expert,
can really determine whether or not a site complies with WCAG. And then,
hardly the site may be unusable, as they have been taken into account the
needs of users.
Received on Friday, 5 August 2011 14:51:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 5 August 2011 14:51:43 GMT