- From: Wayne Dick <wed@csulb.edu>
- Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 16:58:00 -0700
- 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