W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > April to June 2006

Inaccessible Comliant Sites

From: Wayne Dick <wed@csulb.edu>
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 16:58:00 -0700
Message-ID: <44515A88.70300@csulb.edu>
To: "EOWG (E-mail)" <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>

Why People Think W3C Compliant Sites Can Be Inaccessible:

This should start things off. 

1. Websites lie or stretch the truth:  Many institutions claim 
compliance when the claim is not true.  This gives users the impression 
that a compliant website is not accessible. 

2.  Priority 1 is pretty weak:  This compliance leaves some big 
usability holes.  Layout tables are permitted; device independent input 
can be skipped.  That can be enough to render a site profoundly 
difficult if not unusable.

3.  Other guidelines:  Some sites claim compliance with other guidelines 
or cite affiliation with independent accessibility projects to support 
accessibility claims.  Again the user sees the claim of accessibility 
and assumes some level of W3C compliance.

4.  Total reliance on automated tools:  A clean bill of health by an 
evaluation tool is not W3C compliance.  Many people pass tool at a 
certain level and call that their complete audit.  Periodically sites 
must be audited by people. 

5.  Inexperience with assistive technology:  Many new users blame the 
page when they cannot use the assistive technology.  I see this in my 
classes when I use Home Page Reader to illustrate points.



Received on Thursday, 27 April 2006 23:58:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:29:39 UTC