Comments on: The role of automated accessibility testing

By: test control

test control — Wed, 16 Nov 2005 10:38:20 +0000

Yes the automated checkers can only do what they are programmed to but there are so many different situations that only manual check can help, cause we can't foresee everything.

By: Carl Grint

Carl Grint — Mon, 03 Oct 2005 13:21:44 +0000

The one thing I find a little annoying with the automated checkers is the inability of them to work out what is an image and what is not.
So when it comes back and tells you not to use Pixels, and you check the line, it can turn out to be an Image..!
Whilst those of use experienced in the use of this checker can simply ignore this as a blip, I know a number of people who find the output from these automated checkers confusing enough, let alone when it tells them not to use Pixels for an Image width and height.
In an ideal world we would all have the time and resources built into projects to check for a wide range of devices and users, but for most, it is based on experience, and the shared knowledge we gain over time.
Who can afford to spend nearly £1000 on a speech reader to check a site..? I know I can’t, and rely on the timed trails on a number of them to try out sites and try and remember how it worked best.
Although image how this impacts on the very people who need the software just ot use their computers…maybe it is time this specialist software was massively reduced in cost…surely the Bill Gates of this world could spare some funds to reduce the cost to diabled people in using IT, afterall it helps everyone of us who are disabled in so many ways.

By: Paul Boag

Paul Boag — Fri, 23 Sep 2005 09:52:18 +0000

To be honest I am not convinced there is such a thing as the "best method". The trouble is that there are so many types of disability, so many platforms and so many devices that its impossible to test on everything. I think all you can do is take a long hard look at your users and make decisions against that. It is a very difficult subject with no clear cut answers

By: Dennis Lembree

Dennis Lembree — Fri, 23 Sep 2005 04:45:31 +0000

Although they can be redundant and tedious, I agree that autocheckers for Accessibility are better than nothing. You can also try the checker Cindy Says, which is more direct than some others. I believe one should just be as knowledgeable as possible on the subject when validating for Accessibility, that way he can more easily go through the manual checks and confirm the automated ones. Of course, the best method would be having several impaired users go through the site with different user agents and input devices.