N
Neal
Which would you recommend for general testing, and can you estimate the
cost for purchase?
Which would you recommend for general testing, and can you estimate the
cost for purchase?
J
jake
Neal said:
I use IBM's Home Page Reader (HPR) for testing (works in a 'symbiotic'
relationship with MSIE, so you need IE installed).
Here's a comparative survey done a year-or-so ago:
http://www.camo.qc.ca/ntic/csun2002en.htm
The pricing's here:
http://www-3.ibm.com/able/solution_offerings/hpr2.html#order
There's a 30-day free trial available so you can see if it's what you
want.
Usually, HPR is the last thing that I use to test a page with as I find
that running Opera with:
(a) Frames off ........ checks if there's a 'noframes' entry showing the
way to the frame-less version
(b) Tables off ........ checks linearization
(c) Images off ........ checks for missing alternative text on images
and maps
(d) Javascript off .... checks if it works without JS enabled, or
if there's a 'noscript' entry for an
alternative
facility.
(e) (minimal) user stylesheet on ...... just sets the text and
background as I like to see them, and applies a simple shading to
headers so I can see immediately where they are - if any. Tests if page
makes sense if no stylesheet is available
(f) short-cut to the w3c validator
can pick up a lot of accessibility issues (if you're looking for them).
HPR picks up the more obscure ones (such as words running together) and
checks that data tables and forms are correctly marked up and function
correctly, and that frames-based sites are navigable, etc.
regards.
N
Neal
Sounds essentially the same as a check with Lynx... aside from tables.
A
Andy Dingley
mark | r said:
They're attracted by chunks of plain text, but rendered as bitmap
images instead?
This is very true. Dancing Penguins might be evil, but there's
certainly a level at which some customers are attracted by them.
Your site is _BORING_. It's not "design led" or anything bogus but
superficially appealing like that, it's just tedious newspaper column
content, but done badly, and at great cost too. XHTML validation is a
PITA, but you've gone to the trouble of jumping through that hoop and
_still_ produced no useful benefit.
Sometimes people achieve the worst of both worlds. But your site seems
to have achieved three.
No you don't. You're demonstrably clueless. It's not that your site
is inaccessible, it's that it's _needlessly_ inaccessible. We're not
even arguing about cost/benefit ratios of some Flash gewgaw you've
picked up as eye-candy, just how you've taken simple text layout and
made it awkward. Your site could be easily accessible, look no
different, and wouldn't even take much effort to do that. Instead
though, you're quibbling about Bobbytrivia.
ROFL !
Certification ! Don't make me laugh. What sort ? CIW
M
mark | r
Andy Dingley said:"mark | r" <[email protected]> wrote in message
They're attracted by chunks of plain text, but rendered as bitmap
images instead?
This is very true. Dancing Penguins might be evil, but there's
certainly a level at which some customers are attracted by them.
Your site is _BORING_. It's not "design led" or anything bogus but
superficially appealing like that, it's just tedious newspaper column
content, but done badly, and at great cost too. XHTML validation is a
PITA, but you've gone to the trouble of jumping through that hoop and
_still_ produced no useful benefit.
Sometimes people achieve the worst of both worlds. But your site seems
to have achieved three.
No you don't. You're demonstrably clueless. It's not that your site
is inaccessible, it's that it's _needlessly_ inaccessible. We're not
even arguing about cost/benefit ratios of some Flash gewgaw you've
picked up as eye-candy, just how you've taken simple text layout and
made it awkward. Your site could be easily accessible, look no
different, and wouldn't even take much effort to do that. Instead
though, you're quibbling about Bobbytrivia.
ROFL !
Certification ! Don't make me laugh. What sort ? CIW
BA HONS DESIGN: NEW MEDIA, Staffordshire University
mark
M
mark | r
(a) You have a basic problem with your design which makes parts of the
thanks i'll add that in
damned, ive been trying to remember that technique for ages now
Yeah, you showed that in the 1st grab, thanks
Yes this is a placeholder as this is gonna rotate through comments.
cheers
mark
thanks i'll add that in
damned, ive been trying to remember that technique for ages now
Yeah, you showed that in the 1st grab, thanks
Yes this is a placeholder as this is gonna rotate through comments.
cheers
mark
R
rf
mark | r said:
Years ago part of my job was to hire mainframe programmers. Invariably the
ones with a degree in Computer Science or something were way to theoretical,
out of touch with the Real World.
The best programmer I ever hired had an honours degree in Civil Engineering
and had changed career track because he was sick of designing toilets at the
local airport. *He* had no preconceived ideas about How To Do Things, just a
willingness to learn.
Most degrees, especially arts degrees, are not worth the pulp they are
printed on. It is only *post graduate* experience that counts IMHO.
T
Toby A Inkster
rf said:
The engineering graduate asks "does that work?"
The science graduate asks "how does that work?"
The philosophy graduate asks "why does that work?"
The liberal arts graduate asks "would you like fries with that?"
E
Els
Toby said:
<g>
A
Andy Dingley
No, the RNIB website is an infamous ****-up.
A site that bad usually required lottery funding.
J
jake
It's also unfortunate that they have to invent their own 'see it right'Andy Dingley said:
standards (WAI-A, plus bits-and-pieces of WAI-AA and WAI-AAA, plus
others) and then award the conformity logo to sites that clearly have
accessibility issues ;-)
regards.