Common issues with accessibility statements

Link to us : http://sn.im/uz85h

The accessibility link is usually placed on the outside of the main viewing area of the web page such as footer area, this making it difficult to locate. For example, screen reader user would have to listen to more much content before encountering the link and maybe will give up to know more from it.

Additionally, for keyboard only users, the location of the accessibility link can result in excessive key presses in order to select and then activate the link. The Digital Media Access Group carried out much more knowledge , evaluating the Usability of Online Accessibility Information, which reviewed websites from a broad range of sectors.

Most of the accessibility statements has too much detail on conformance and technologies utilized in making the website accessible. This information shows that the website has been designed with accessibility in mind, it does not provide any benefit to general website visitors. As this information is often placed at the beginning of the accessibility statement, it is likely to confuse website visitors before they even have a chance to read about the accessibility features provided.

The example include:

• The website conforms to the W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Priority 1 and
• The website complies with the requirements of Section 508.
• The HTML is valid and conforms to XHTML 1.0 Strict.
• All pages on this website validate to CSS2.

With technical information, accessibility statements listed the accessibility features which they provide, rather than how to use them. The following is an example of what can typically be found in an accessibility statement:

1. All text sizes are relative.
2. All images have an alt attribute.
3. Style sheets have been used to separate presentation from content.
4. Headings are semantically marked up.
5. Tables have been correctly marked up with headings.
6. Link text is unique which makes it make sense when taken out of context.

And that is why today's these are people who use websites on a daily basis!

Source :http://www.digital-web.com/articles/are_accessibility_statements_useful/

The trouble which met by web-accessibility

Link me: http://snipr.com/ufazv

Do you know, web accessibility have benefits but there are trouble occur too. Actually, the web-accessibility community is in deep trouble. The trouble in 1 will be FLASH.

As we know, the technology today's is evolving every moments. Since the Web content accessibility Guildline 1.0 was published as a W3C recommendation on 5th May 1999. That's now well over few years ago. Microsoft's Internet Explorer had just eclipsed Netscape Navigator 4 as the top dog browser.

Few years later, technology has moved on. Using web standards is now a feasible development approach. Flash has come along in leaps and bounds. Unfortunately WCAG hasn't. A WCAG 1.1 would look quite different if it were a snapshot of technology perhaps even of two years ago. (WCAG 2.0 looks drastically different in its accommodation of technologies - for example, the baseline approach.)

Technology evolving! It improves, especially in its ability to make content accessible. Technology is one very important factor in web accessibility today's. In the days of Flash 5, when accessible Flash was an oxymoron. But wake up. It is certainly no longer that clear cut today. Macromedia and Adobe have made some excellent progress in the last five years. And now there is a community springing up that's embracing accessibility.When two Flash Experts spend time with the RNIB, testing, learning, understanding how disabled people use the web, and how Flash can enhance their experiences - it's a Straussian epoc. When the SHAW TRUST is actively engaged in testing the accessibility of Flash, and give it a thumbs up - its another Also Sprach Zarathustra moment. Put those together, and the facade some accessibility 'experts' (still cowering from monolith) desperately want you to believe collapses.

The web accessibility community needs to be actively engaged with the Flash accessibility community. There's a surprising amount of cross-over and idea-swapping opportunities to be explored. The coolest example is Lawrence Carvalho's and Christian Heilmann's Text rezise detection recently published on A List Apart.

Now, They got their Solution which Flash has an advantage over HTML and CSS in that it is far better placed in dealing with learning based or reading based disabilities. Its foundation as a vector based graphics engine trumps HTML's and CSS' mediocre feature set when tackling disability barriers best met with interactivity and graphics. Its time to admit, Flash is part of the web accessibility toolbox.

For more information, you can log in:http://www.isolani.co.uk/blog/access/AccessibilityInTrouble1Flash

Source:http://www.isolani.co.uk/blog/access/AccessibilityInTrouble1Flash