- From: Ian Sharpe <isforums@manx.net>
- Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2011 15:40:28 +0100
- To: "'Morten Tollefsen'" <morten@medialt.no>, "'Terry Dean'" <Terry.Dean@chariot.net.au>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Couldn't agree more. -----Original Message----- From: Morten Tollefsen [mailto:morten@medialt.no] Sent: 05 August 2011 15:28 To: Terry Dean; Ian Sharpe; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org Subject: SV: Accessible content management system Hi! I find this discussion both typical, interesting and a little bit frustrating:-)! It is not surprising that developers want standards. Standards are of course important for html, css. Smil, javascript, ... Accessibility on the other hand is more comparable with human aspects of a service/app/site like: creativity, usability, beautifulness, understandability, ... CMS typically are flexible and creative tools, so - to say that all output is accessible is perhaps very difficult! It is however possible to produce accessible contents using several CMSes. Unfortunately most of these systems are not too accessible as production tools (at least this is my experience). In my company we therefore created our own CMS some years ago because about 50% of the staff is visually impaired. I've not seen a validator capable of telling us if a site look nice? But, it is possible to figure out if the stylesheet is valid? I've not seen a validator capable of telling us if a text/scheme is understandable for a user, but it is possible to figure out if the html code is valid. ... and so on! The same is more or less the case for accessibility: it's fairly easy to validate but still end up with important accessibility problems. In other words: WCAG and other accessibility guidelines are great tools. Even with great tools it is however possible to build bad things. Guidelines for accessibility are extremely helpful and WAI has done (and still does) great work! As involved in several large web projects however, I am sometimes shocked when project spend hundreds of howers discussing information architecture, interaction design, infrastructure database architecture etc. etc. And to make the hole thing accessible a set of "GUIDELINES" or in the best case a small user test some days before the site is lunched should guarantee "usability for all". In most cases accessibility and even good usability is fairly easy, but if the goal is to end up with really successful results, the solution is to include universal design as an integrated development criteria! Someone need to engage an expert (like for most other areas, e. g. the example areas mentioned above), while others have their own accessibility resources. Expertise must include to be able to find a representative test group. Everybody knows that user testing is important, but in most cases serious testing is given little priority (except in the principal speech:-). - Morten
Received on Friday, 5 August 2011 14:43:31 UTC