accessibility

The Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) is set of resources to help make the Web accessible to people with disabilities.

agile

Balanced views on the strengths and weaknesses of modern web development methodologies, and lessons learnt.

seo

Good (S)earch (E)ngine (O)ptimisation starts with a well coded website, and integration with key web services.

testing

Testing opinions and experiences on modern developments projects, in media, mobile and publishing industries.

usability

Design and functional usability are essential to user-friendly websites, and is fundamentally rooted in common sense.

Home » testing

Web Accessibility is not the CJB

Submitted by Paul on Tuesday, 20 February 2007No Comment

I spent last night joining in discussion on the segala blog, reference web accessibility. I was suprised at the level of resistance, and indeed the emotional arguments put forward against the adoptions of such “laws”. Some countries have now made it law that websites should adhere to the W3C accessibility guidelines, and there is strong moral argument for it. I am bemused by the counter arguments - but in capacity of QA I think the benefits far outweigh the negatives.

(Excerpt from my comments thread)

Disability has been a low priority in web design for many years, and in doing so ignoring a large audience. I welcome the W3C move, and following accessibility guidelines not only assists in good coding and design practice, it enables sites to have more reach. The guidelines are not there to restrict development, but to ensure that accessibility and coding standards are included in the scope of a project.

I believe that the WWW is probably tired of processing bloated media-heavy sites, that are largely pointless. I know I am. If the dissenters are saying the the new guidelines will be costly and difficult to implement from business and/or marketing perspective, lets hear some actual examples. Rather than meaningless comparisons. I am sure there were similar complaints of costs, overheads when someone dared to suggest subtitles for television programmes.

The knee-jerk reaction to web accessibility movement has been disappointing to-date, and this article and responses has highlighted this. The web has been filled with so many sub-standard and overblown web sites, it is not only accessibility that has suffered - quality has also suffered.

… I see the effort as maintaining the standards of the web. How can you truly know your audience, unless you enable them with the ability to access your world?

Rules always bring out the child-like instinctive resistance in us, but I think the perception here is overblown. Web Accessibility is not the Criminal Justice Bill, and the only real result of these efforts will be better quality web - the potential increased time/effort will be filling the time/effort that should have been applied in development in the first place. The www is not a toy …

Leave a comment!

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.