- From: Jorge Fernandes <jorge.f@netcabo.pt>
- Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2011 12:01:33 +0100
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
In my experience with CMS, open source like Plone and Joomla (until 1.5) and proprietary like Sharepoint I was confronted all the time with two problems: 1) Mix of metadata and HTML elements in back end source fields. For example the title of page use the same source field to produce for example: <title>Manual de instruções das WCAG</title> and <h1>Manual de instruções das <acronym title="Web Content Accessibility Guideline" lang="en">WCAG</acronym></h1> For example in Contao, I only see the title field and it is used to produce <title> and others HTML elements. We only get: <title>Manual de instruções das WCAG</title> <h1>Manual de instruções das WCAG</h1> /* not conform to WCAG 1.0 - priority 1 */ <ul> <li>Manual de instruções das WCAG</li> /* not conform to WCAG 1.0 - priority 1 */ ... </ul> 2) The HTML editor is my main problem. I can't find a flexible editor that permit: - an output conform with HTML standards; - that use external CSS and do not use deprecated HTML attributes and/ or elements; - that don't add (in a tentative to correct the code) things like <img ... border="0"> - that permit to mark the language changes throught the documents (we use it a lot in portuguese writing). Things like: <span lang="en" xml:lang="en">just in time</span> - almost all the HTML editors I know, when we introduce directly HTML then try to correct it and do bad things to our code. Almost in all my projects in Plone, Joomla, Sharepoint, Oracle, I don't use HTML editors. I use Dreamweaver and then copy/paste the info to the CMS. Shame of me! :-) - etc. I saw that Contao have techniques to make automatically things like "Good" by <span lang="en">Good</span>. This seems to me a weak solution. I need something more robust. In contao HTML editor I tried this: <p>Este é um texto em <em lang="en" xml:lang="en">portuguese</em></p> With Contao I write the paragraph; then select "portuguese" and press the button to <em>. So far, so good. Then, with the "portuguese" word selected, I press the button to introduce atributes in <em> element. The result was: <p lang="en" xml:lang="en">Este é um texto em <em>portuguese</em></p> That is not what we want! My dream is have the dreamweaver working directly to edit HTML in the fields of the CMS (I do it with copy/paste) and a power solution to do find/replaces directly in the DataBase (I do it with phpmyadmin when use MySQL). Cheers, Jorge Fernandes On 4 Aug 2011, at 10:37, Ian Sharpe wrote: > Hi Phil > > Totally agree and would also re-emphasise the point that jim made in > relation to this point as well as module or extension development. > No matter > how well designed and conformant a CMS might be, it is always going > to be > the case that the author of any given site must also consider the > theme and > any modules or extensions it uses in order to ensure a site is > accessible. > > The point I was making with regard to Plone, (and Drupal), is more > that both > of these communities has expressed a strong desire or even > commitment to > improve the accessiblity of their platforms which is encouraging. As > it is > also encouraging to hear that blind people are successfully > administrating > sites using Drupal or Contao for example. > > Cheers > Ian > > -----Original Message----- > From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] > On Behalf > Of Phil Evans > Sent: 04 August 2011 07:52 > To: flybynight > Cc: 'Terry Dean'; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > Subject: Re: Accessible content management system > > Hi all, > > Just a very small contribution, as I don't use CMS at all: > >> As does Plone which also looks very good. > > Is this true? I have not used Plone from the developer point of > view, but a > website which I visit regularly uses Plone. If I feed pages frmo that > website to the W3C HTML validator they fail -- only a couple of > relatively > minor errors, but nonetheless I (naively?) would hope that a CMS which > aspires to serve accessible content will at least provide valid > content. > > As a side issue, which you're probably all aware of, no CMS could ever > guarantee accessibilty on its own. For example, a (plone-based) site > I have > used chose red on green as its colour scheme; ignoring that fact that > red/green colour-blindness (very common) would render the page > unusable! > > > Phil > > >> >> Typo3 would seem to be quite usable apparently although I haven't >> spent any time looking into this at this stage. >> >> However, you may well want to take a look at contao: >> http://www.contao.org >> >> Which looks very good from my initial view. >> >> I haven't validated it yet but it seemed very usable with only the >> keyboard and has a nice clean and simple interface, while still >> having >> all the features you'd expect to see in a leading CMS. It even has a >> load of shortcut keys that are described in the main admin screen. >> You >> can try the online demo from their home page. >> >> I'd be interested to hear what you and others think? >> >> Incidentally, have you looked at DNN recently? I'm guessing it hasn't >> got any better but I do know they were keen on conformance with W3C >> guidelines, although which ones I'm not exactly sure. >> >> Cheers >> Ian >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On >> Behalf Of Terry Dean >> Sent: 03 August 2011 21:14 >> To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org >> Subject: Re: Accessible content management system >> >> Hi Ian, >> >> If you do find one that conforms to the W3C Web Accessibility >> guidelines please let me know. Its one thing to claim that a CMS is >> compliant and another to actually be accessible. >> >> You only need to run a few accessibility tools over these CMSs to >> find >> that they are generally full of problems. >> >> I dont claim to have the answers and I do not build these systems but >> I can understand how difficult they must be to make compliant. I >> remember trying to modify DotNetNuke in 2000 in order to validate it >> to XHTML Strict 1.0 and gave up in the end. >> >> regards, >> >> Terry >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Ian Sharpe"<isforums@manx.net> >> To: "'Terry Dean'"<Terry.Dean@chariot.net.au>;<w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> >> Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 6:32 PM >> Subject: RE: Accessible content management system >> >> >>> Hi Terry >>> >>> While I understand where you're coming from and based on the >>> feedback >>> I've received so far, would accept your belief that at this time, >>> such a solution does not exist, I would challenge your statement >>> that >>> this is not a serious question. >>> >>> Much of the web these days is generated through CMSs and this is >>> only >>> going to increase over time. One of the founding principals of the >>> web for me at least is giving everyone the opportunity to have their >>> say and hear what everyone else is saying. It follows that if >>> members >>> of the disabled or less technically competant communities are unable >>> to voice their opinions and thoughts as easily as those without any >>> barriers to access and author content (particularly when it's in >>> relation to accessing and authoring content), this voice will become >>> quieter when it should be getting louder. >>> >>> Ensuring that there is at least one accessible and feature rich CMS >>> would therefore seem vital in terms of the web's accessibility to >>> me. >>> >>> It is therefore a very serious question and while there doesn't >>> appear to currently be a single solution, I hope that you are at >>> least encouraged, even if only a little, by the comments others have > made. >>> >>> Cheers >>> ian >> >> >> > > -- > ------------------------- > > Phil Evans, > Swift Development Scientist > X-ray and Observational Astronomy Group, University of Leicester > > Tel: +44 (0)116 252 5059 > Mobile: +44 (0)7780 980240 > pae9@star.le.ac.uk > http://www.star.le.ac.uk/~pae9 > http://www.swift.ac.uk > > Follow me as a Swift scientist on Twitter: @swift_phil > http://www.star.le.ac.uk/~pae9/twitter > >
Received on Thursday, 4 August 2011 11:02:18 UTC