- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@sidar.org>
- Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 11:25:51 +1100
- To: iris <iristopa@yahoo.com>
- Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
I think you are taking the wrong approach, and in the long run one that might be harmful. You can defend yourself against all but the most stupid regulations by making the same argument you make to your boss - that the tool is wrong and you are right. If you can find a handful of experts to back you up (and in many cases this is a good forum to find a handful of internationally acknowledged experts who will happily publish a statement like that for a particular case), you shouldn't have any worries. It is, of course a slippery slope between "most experts agree that tool Z produces an unreliable result for test Y" and "a couple of my friends and I don't like meeting checkpoint X so claim it is irrelevant". Keeping yourself from sliding down there is what makes you an accessibility professional, and therefore worth more than the software you are using. (For the record I am happy to state that a report saying a site failed Bobby is not necessarily a reliable indicator of whether it meets the requirements of WCAG - most of the reports I have seen which use Bobby or similar tools for testing have fairly poor methodology, and very few of them are, in my opinion, good enough to be trusted over general opinions on specific topics that I see on this list...) cheers Chaals On Thursday, Jan 23, 2003, at 11:13 Australia/Melbourne, iris wrote: > i wish it was that easy and normally i would only care > about making a website truly accessible no matter what > the automated checkers say. > > but then my boss, who hired me as an accessibility > expert, says, why doesn't our site pass the bobby > test? i might spend a few minutes trying to explain > my decisions to him and might even succeed. but how > do i defend myself against a publicly available report > on the accessibility of higher education project > websites where one of my sites is listed as failing > bobby. > > i have applied numerous (what i consider) hacks to > please bobby just so that my sites *look* accessible > to outsiders. > -- Charles McCathieNevile charles@sidar.org Fundación SIDAR http://www.sidar.org
Received on Wednesday, 22 January 2003 19:26:17 UTC