I agree with Theresa regarding the Bobby validator service. There are a couple other ones as well. The validators are good tools to check for website accessibility problems, but the validators are automated and don't solve the problems for the web designer; they just point out the problems - it's up to the designer to make these corrections (if relevant). Most webdesigners aren't even aware that they are creating features that might not be accessible for some people using different browsers, old computers, computers without speaker capabilities, slow modems, or those from outside of US and parts of Europe, and those with disabilities. I came across a good definition for universal web access given by the Canandian government's website... "Universal accessibility ensures that sites are developed to serve the largest possible audience, using the broadest range of hardware and software platforms, and that the needs of users with disabilities are considered.

In my paper, I will cover general design principles (layout, color, background, navigation, language, etc) and the access problems/solutions for features that you typically find on museum websites (images, image maps, bullets, links, audio/video clips, frames, navigational aids, animated images, PDF files, etc.). Some of these features cannot become totally accessible, but they can be made more accessible or have links to alternate pages for those who have trouble accessing the information.

I would be happy to share my paper (draft form) in Dec. or Jan. for those interested. As for the website I will be setting up, that will happen sometime this winter. Compared to the paper, the website will probably do a better job demonstrating the problems/solutions with examples as well as provide links to other pages.

Hope this letter wasn't too long...
Kristin (Schumacher) Johnson
[log in to unmask]




>>> Theresa Devine <[log in to unmask]> 10/31/99 07:56am >>>
I have examined this "excellent" service with an eye from the web
development community.  Please be aware that there is much conflicting
information given to the user at this site.  Those people with limited
computer/internet literacy will be impressed with a long list of
"official" responses.  In reality - this automated system gives
conflicting information.

For example:  It had a hard time with image maps and java script
mouseovers.  These are standard practice in the industry and have been
for some time. They are both backwards compatible to versions 3.0 of
browsers.

Then in contradiction the service suggested that style sheets should be
used whenever possible.  Cascading Style Sheets are new to the industry
and each browser reads them differently and are only backwards
compatible to 4.0 versions of browsers.

In addition:
This service also had no idea what to do with ASP code and internal
links to subfolders.

The only piece of information I found valuable was the download time.

The point of this message is then - I caution you to utilize this
"checking system" without a trained eye to decipher the response. If you
decide to use the results please have your local webmaster evaluate the
results for you.

========================================================Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ museum-l.html. You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to
[log in to unmask] The body of the message should read "Signoff
Museum-L" (without the quotes).