Getting the Word Out On Web Standards and Accessibility October 20, 2006
Posted by ptvGuy. Comments: 6 comments
…otherwise intelligent business people are entrusting their entire web presence to such as these…
Let's face it, we live in a world where any high school kid with a semester course in "web design" (if even that much training) and a copy of Frontpage can hang out a virtual shingle calling himself (or herself) a "webmaster." Factor WordPress into that with its five-minute install and innumerable themes and you have a job title glutted with people who don't know the first thing about what they're doing. An amazingly large number of otherwise intelligent business people are entrusting their entire web presence to such as these. The general public's lack of knowledge in this area only serves to exacerbate the problem.
Without any foreseeable way to prevent this practice from continuing and growing exponentially, those of us who care are left with the onus of attempting to educate these fledgling webmasters about the need for good coding practices, accessibility, and web standards. I know, many of you have been doing that for years already, but this is an ongoing problem requiring constant reminders.
To help out in this endeavor (and to provide professional web developers with yet one more way to stand out from the crowd,) I've created a document called the "Declaration of Standards Compliance." The style and wording may sound a little familiar to you.
When in the course of online events, it becomes necessary for web developers to ensure access to the content over which they have so meticulously labored and to assume among the powers and tools available to them, the basic responsibility to ensure proper markup and accessibility, a decent respect for their site’s users regardless of their browser, platform, or possible disabilities requires that they should declare their document type for proper page rendering and their assent to basic web standards.
–ptvGuy, Declaration of Standards Compliance
…need for web standards and accessibility cannot be understated…
Now, before anyone gets in an uproar and thinks that I am perhaps mocking the document upon which this is based–The Declaration of Independence–I'm not. I don't know of a clearer way to outline an ongoing problem and then express the need for action and the conviction to carry it out. As a pure study in writing, it's one of the greatest essays ever written. I humbly borrow from the masters.
The need for web standards and accessibility cannot be understated. If you're putting content out there for the world to see, use, and interact with, then there is a certain underlying responsibility to do it correctly. That requires some extra work and study. Fortunately, the web is full of people willing to share that knowledge. I've put together a list of such resources on my Anal Coding page to serve as a beginning point. The very abundance of this information made freely available to everyone everywhere is what makes the practice of bad coding so pointedly shameful.
…standards are themselves evolving and subject to change…
One important thing to remember, however, is that the web is not a static technology. It is constantly growing, expanding, and evolving. New people, ideas, and technologies will come along and suddenly change everything we've taken for granted. (That may even include the aforementioned high school student.) The standards, therefore, that guide us in the creation of accessible and well-coded pages are themselves evolving and subject to change.
I encourage you to read the document itself, comment on it, and, if you agree with it, go to the declaration page and find out how to become a signatory of this important declaration and thereby further get the word out on the need for web standards and accessibility.
Thank you all, code well, and good night.
- << First
- < Previous
- Web Accessibility
- Next >
- Last >>
Accessibility: WCAG 2.0 and You June 8, 2006
Posted by ptvGuy. Comments: 2 comments…new set of Web Content Accessibility Guidelines…
We interrupt our irregularly scheduled series on web accessibility for a not so late breaking news flash (sans Flash, of course.) It seems that the W3C is on the verge of releasing a whole new set of Web Content Accessibility Guidelines called WCAG 2.0. With numerous changes in place, it now seems that the whole set of guidelines that many of us have worked so hard to implement are all kind of up in the air.
In many ways, the discussions about the document reflect the disparate philosophical positions within the community on what "accessibility" means.
– Bruce Lawson WCAG 2.0: when I want a beer, don’t give me shandy
Whether this new set of guidelines is the incredibly forward-looking, non-technology-dependant vision of accessibility it claims to be or whether it's a backsliding, meaningless bunch of drivel meant to pander to corporate interests is currently the subject of much debate across the Internet by people far smarter and better informed than I. Perhaps at some point these discussions will include real people with real disabilities who, for some reason, have very little to do with this, but currently that doesn't seem to be the case.
WCAG 2 backtracks on basics of responsible web development that are well accepted by standardistas. WCAG 2 is not enough of an improvement and was not worth the wait.
– Joe Clark A LIST APART: To Hell with WCAG 2
To be fair, the new guidelines are, in fact, a work in progress and not formally approved yet. Still, it's a hard read. I mean it. I actually sat down to read the complete documentation and was only two pages into it before I found myself thinking how much I'd rather be at a dental appointment. So, I apologize for not having time to wade through the massive, unreadable documentation. I'll have to leave that to others.
I'm fully aware of the fact that not everyone who reads Joe's article will wade through several hundred pages from the 3 WCAG specifications, and who could blame you? I read them, but the specs are certainly long, tedious and, in many cases, extremely difficult to comprehend.
– Lachlan Hunt WCAG 2.0
Perhaps groups like the WCAG Samurai wouldn't have to exist if the WAI committee didn't tend to move and operate like a sumo wrestler itself. After all, there is something to be said for open discussion and actual accomplishment.
…simply a matter of good design and usability…
The simple fact of the matter is that I actually have to work for a living. I build real websites that serve real needs in real communities and are used by real people–only some of whom have disabilities. Frankly, I don't get paid for any of this. Not one client of mine has ever asked for or even commented on having an accessible website. It's something that I do on my own because I consider it to be part of the job. It's simply a matter of good design and usability.
The only ray of hope I can find in the whole thing is that perhaps this will encourage website owners (especially those in the public sector) to think beyond checking the WCAG checkbox. Maybe this will make them think about how to really make their site more accessible rather than simply concentrating on covering their collective arses.
– Paul Boag Body blow to web accessibility guidelines
What do we do in the face of all this debate? Quite simply, those of us that actually make websites and care about making them useful and accessible to real people are just going to have to go on doing the best we can on our own–as, in fact, we've pretty much been doing. We will continue to use our own brains to think about what we're doing and how we can make it as useful as possible to all users. That's all there is to it. We're already going above and beyond the requirements of our sites.
…underlying budget and time limitations…
So, before we get too carried away, keep this in mind. Even the home page of the W3C itself only claims WCAG 1, level 1 compliance. Yes, we can and should go above that. Section 508 alone gets into levels 1 and 2. However, lets not lose track of our underlying budget and time limitations. We don't expect an accessible building to have a hospital built into it. We don't have to go that far with our websites either.
WCAG 2.0, like WCAG 1.0 before it, is a set of guidelines. It's not a wall or a fence. If it leads you where you need to go, great. If not, then you gotta find your own way. After all, it's you that your clients and users depend on, not the W3C.
Thank you all, code well, and good night.
Accessibility: Web Design for the Mobility-Impaired May 17, 2006
Posted by ptvGuy. Comments: 2 comments…Accessibility is about making the page useful to everyone…
Mobility impairment isn't always as obvious as you might think it is. You don't have to imagine extremes of disability like paralysis or missing limbs. Try imagining a simple fall or other accident that results in both hands in a cast and unable to use a mouse. Now, with that in mind, open your website in your browser, put an unsharpened pencil in your mouth, and try to use the eraser to push the TAB key till you get all the way to the main content of your page. With a properly placed "skipnav", one TAB key click gets you to the link, and a click on the ENTER key gets you to the main content. That's accessibility. It's the web equivalent of an entry ramp.
A skipnav is a link placed at the very beginning of the page (before any other page content) that allows a user to skip all the top-bar and sidebar navigation links and go straight to the main content. It's generally a simple text link placed either in the beginning of the header or in a separate DIV prior to the header. It's one of the very few pieces of page content considered acceptable for cloaking (matching text color to the background color or using CSS to size it or slide it off-screen to make it invisible to the user.) Like most accessibility options, it exists primarily for disabled users and doesn't have to be visible to be useful. (On a side note, the PBS Station Prototype Website provides an already named landing point for such a link, but it was placed there for the CSS.)
…anything that might make a user's hands uncooperative…
Web design for limited mobility also includes checking your scripts to see if your behaviors are mouse-centric. Without touching your mouse, try to get around your site. There aren't perfect keyboard equivalents of all mouse events, but the major ones are pretty basic. If you have a CLICK event, add the same KEYPRESS event. If you have a MOUSEOVER event, add the same FOCUS event. If you have a MOUSEOUT event, add the same BLUR event. Accessibility is about making the page useful to everyone no matter how they get to it or have to get around it.
The ACCESSKEY value of the anchor tag is another good and far underused feature to add to your navigation system. Even though it's not currently supported in some browsers and browser versions, it's one of those things that doesn't hurt your page by being there. Browsers that don't support it just ignore it. Users hold the ALT key (the CONTROL key for Mac users) and press the specified, single alphanumeric character to either set focus on or activate a link depending on the browser. It allows you to set keyboard shortcuts for primary site navigation.
…it's about making it easier and more intuitive. That's usability…
Other aspects of mobility impairment related to computer usage may not occur to you initially. These include slowed reflexes, lack of coordination, tremors, ticks, palsy, arthritis, and anything else that might make a user's hands uncooperative. I, for one, have a hard time double-clicking fast enough (due to nerve damage) for the computer to register it as such. Therefore, avoid page design that relies on a site visitor's speed and eye/hand coordination–unless, of course, you want your page to feel like a video game. Avoid single character or single digit hyperlinks on a page or image maps with tiny hot spots. (I know, scripted image maps are a whole other issue.)
You would not believe the number of web pages I've been to that use words like "I" or the number "1" as important content links. Try to hit that after six cups of coffee. Our goal isn't to make it harder for site visitors to use our sites; it's about making it easier and more intuitive. That's usability. It's the web equivalent of a well-ordered office directory posted clearly on the wall with neatly labeled signs on every door.
I know that these things will require a little extra time and effort, but they're worth it. It's just not that hard to imagine yourself in need of them.
