[Accessibleweb] AccessibleWeb@U Meeting - Thursday, May 15, 11:30-1:00, MGH 015L

[E.A. Draffan]

I would love to apply these guidelines to Web 2.0 type pages such as those I
have collected at http://droopy.ecs.soton.ac.uk/webel/ but I have a feeling
I will have to double up on the matrix so you have results for simply
reading the pages and results for writing or interacting with the pages -
uploading items etc.  

I have to admit I was going to use similar tests but at the moment have the
manual checks as one record - I am going to divide it up but dread the fact
that we now have 14 plus checks and I have also added one for 'personal
preferences'. This is whether the pages offers the user a chance to change
items such and colour and font size through the browser or via the site
options.  Web 2.0 also involves logging in etc. I am not looking forward to
the task! Any advice to make it easier would be welcomed! 

Best wishes E.A. 

Mrs E.A. Draffan
Learning Societies Lab,
ECS, University of Southampton,
Tel +44 (0)23 8059 7246
http://www.lexdis.ecs.soton.ac.uk
http://www.emptech.info


-----Original Message-----
From: accessibleweb-bounces at mailman1.u.washington.edu
[mailto:accessibleweb-bounces at mailman1.u.washington.edu] On Behalf Of Rick
Ells
Sent: 14 May 2008 20:46
To: accessibleweb at u.washington.edu
Subject: [Accessibleweb] AccessibleWeb at U Meeting - Thursday, May 15,
11:30-1:00, MGH 015L


       Topic: Accessibility Evaluation Procedure Discussion
     Speaker: Open discussion
        Date: Thursday, May 15, 2008
        Time: 11:30a.m. - 1:00p.m.
    Location: Mary Gates Hall, Room 015L

Come join in the discussion on what accessibility evaluation procedure
would best suit the needs of UW Web site developers and managers.

We currently have a procedure that we roughed out a few years ago at...
  http://www.washington.edu/accessibility/accessibleweb/eval_proc.html
...which includes Terry Thompson's 14 item rating checklist.

  o Would it us to help improve the UW's overall IT accessibility if
    we all agreed on a basic evaluation procedure? ("My site got
    a 9.8 on its UW Access Evaluation test, how about yours?")
  o What should a UW Accessibility evaluation procedure consist of?
  o How can the procedure itself or the report of the results
    be done to help the developer better understand accessible design?
  o What should it check for?
  o What tools can help us do the checking?
  o Are there tools we could host here that would help support
    accessible design. An example of such a tool is the open source
    ATRC Web Accessibility Checker
      (http://checker.atrc.utoronto.ca/index.html)
  o Besides a general evaluation procedure, what else would help you
    create and maintain accessible IT services?
_______________________________________________
Accessibleweb mailing list
Accessibleweb at u.washington.edu
http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/accessibleweb

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.16/1431 - Release Date: 13/05/2008
19:55
 

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.16/1431 - Release Date: 13/05/2008
19:55