The Joomla! Forum ™



Forum rules


Forum Rules
Absolute Beginner's Guide to Joomla! <-- please read before posting, this means YOU.



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: 508C Compliance
PostPosted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 1:28 am 
Joomla! Champion
Joomla! Champion

Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 3:35 pm
Posts: 7056
Location: Nebraska
absalom wrote:
jlleblanc wrote:
This is going to be a HUGE help here in Washington DC where people ask "Is it 508 compliant?" before signing off on a Joomla! site.


It's about as 508 compliant as Milkyway.. (no kidding!)


Lawrence -

The "Congratulations!" thread is to congratulate and thank. So, if you want to dispute or fine tune claims about 508C testing, let's do it in this thread. Joe's comment was THANKING Robert and Angie that in Washington DC, where he works, he can offer Joomla! with more confidence.

Now, I agree with Joe. I work at a large state research institution. We receive a great deal of federal funds - that means we have to meet 508C standards. We measure compliance using Cynthia Says < http://www.cynthiasays.com/ >. I have evaluated the BEEZ template with the base Joomla! install and - I'll be tickled pink if that thing doesn't pass the standards. Good news for us, Lawrence!

Your statement was vague. So, please help me better understand your point. Everything you say needs to include explanations that I can follow. So, I'm old and this is not my area of expertise. You'll have to go slow. Give me links. I want to reproduce your exact tests so that I can arrive at your conclusions.

In the end, we should agree whether or not Joomla! v 1.5 core code and the BEEZ template does or does not meet 508C. (Then, if it doesn't, we should contribute to a solution that is doable given the Beta code.)

Thanks!
Amy :)

_________________
http://Twitter.com/AmyStephen
http://www.alltogetherasawhole.org/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 508C Compliance
PostPosted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:16 am 
User avatar
Joomla! Ace
Joomla! Ace

Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2005 12:37 am
Posts: 1199
Location: Melbourne, Australia
The basic mechanical test (part 1):
http://www.contentquality.com/mynewtest ... a-beez.com (Joomla Beez site)
versus
http://www.contentquality.com/mynewtest ... Fdemo15%2F (Joomla Official 1.5 demo site)

Quote:
C. 508 Standards, Section 1194.22, (c) Web pages shall be designed so that all information conveyed with color is also available without color, for example from context or markup.
..
K. 508 Standards, Section 1194.22, (k) A text-only page, with equivalent information or functionality, shall be provided to make a web site comply with the provisions of this part, when compliance cannot be accomplished in any other way. The content of the text-only page shall be updated whenever the primary page changes.     
(k) Option A - Check for the string 'Text Version' within the document.     N/V
(k) Option B - Check for a Global Text Version Link within the document.     N/V
(k) Option C - Check for an Accessibility Policy Link within the document.     N/V
L. 508 Standards, Section 1194.22, (l) When pages utilize scripting languages to display content, or to create interface elements, the information provided by the script shall be identified with functional text that can be read by assistive technology.

    * Rule: 6.3.1 - Anchor elements are required not to use javascript for the link target when the NOSCRIPT element is not present in the document. These elements will not cause a failure of the checkpoint if the NOSCRIPT element is found, however, they will be identified.
          o No Anchor elements that use javascript for the link target were found in document body.
    * Rule: 6.3.2 - AREA elements are required not to use javascript for the link target when the NOSCRIPT element is not present in the document. These elements will not cause a failure of the checkpoint if the NOSCRIPT element is found, however, they will be identified.
          o No AREA Elements found in document body.
    * Rule: 6.3.3 - Locate elements that use HTML event handlers.
          o Note: A Element found at Line: 45, Column: 37 contains the 'onclick' event handler.
          o Note: A Element found at Line: 47, Column: 38 contains the 'onclick' event handler.
          o Note: A Element found at Line: 48, Column: 36 contains the 'onclick' event handler.
          o Note: INPUT Element found at Line: 53, Column: 133 contains the 'onblur' event handler.
          o Note: INPUT Element found at Line: 53, Column: 133 contains the 'onfocus' event handler.
    * Rule: 6.3.4 - When SCRIPT Elements are used, the NOSCRIPT element is required in the document.
          o Warning - SCRIPT Element(s) are found in document and the NOSCRIPT element is not.


Not meeting 1194.22 (k) or (l). Lack of an inbuilt access policy (So not the main option for k, nor option A or B).. and the obvious Javascript issues of having a text resizer without any Javascript depreciation or negotation for those without Javascript. And there is some colour coding issues as well in line with 1194.22 (c).

This is just the results of a basic mechanical test, but since my views are no longer respected as an accessibility consultant merely because I understand the flaws present within the design and 'solution, what's the point ? I cannot compromise on the ethics involved in this.. because at the end of the day, accessibility is a personal matter.. meeting people's needs, not merely passing a mechanical tool.

You stated that it's about measurement against a specific tool. Well, Amy, the same tool gives the same results for Milkyway and Beez... which is a rather interesting result, don't you think ?

_________________
Design with integrity : Web accessible solutions
http://www.absalom.biz
http://twitter.com/absalomedia


Last edited by absalom on Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:19 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 508C Compliance
PostPosted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 3:16 am 
Joomla! Champion
Joomla! Champion

Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 3:35 pm
Posts: 7056
Location: Nebraska
Both of those Cynthia tests you are showing are passing. The pulled out piece you are quoting is indicating it was not tested (N/V is not verified). The reason there is no test is because the rules are unable to be objectively defined to the point that a mechanical test can be established (yet.) There is still a great deal of knowledge and experience required to build in increasing levels of accessibility.

Quote:
K. 508 Standards, Section 1194.22, (k) A text-only page, with equivalent information or functionality, shall be provided to make a web site comply with the provisions of this part, when compliance cannot be accomplished in any other way. The content of the text-only page shall be updated whenever the primary page changes.


The first quote on the page linked to, above, says:

Quote:
These provisions of the standards provide the requirements that must be followed by Federal agencies when producing web pages. These provisions apply unless doing so would impose an undue burden.


Well, that's helpful! I wonder what an undue burden is? A headache? ;) But, it's an excellent page for increasing accessibility (and usability).These are the items you are supposed to be mindful of for K:
(a) Text Tags
(b) Multimedia Presentations
(c) Color
(d) Readability
(e) Server-Side Image Maps
(f) Client-Side Image Maps
(g)&(h) Data Table
(i) Frames
(j) Flicker Rate
(k) Text-Only Alternative
(l) Scripts
(m) Applets and Plug-Ins
(n) Electronic Forms
(o) Navigation Links
(p) Time Delays

Here's another great document. It is a tool of 144 pages in length. This "tool" is recommended by the US Government to be used by a) reading and then b) applying each subjective test to determine compliance.  (Unless - of course - it would impose an undue burden to do so!) It doesn't say how many of these tests must be passed or what percentage of the continuum means "passing."

It is frustrating, Lawrence. There is no right way and anyone who believes there is - is WRONG.

++++

Here's what BEEZ demonstrates. It is clear that we do not have to do core hacks to achieve 508C. We can completely control the output of Joomla! v 1.5. The Cynthia test validates tests that can be conducted electronically. We have to use guidelines from that point on because no testing can prove compliance or lack of compliance.

This is big news for those of us who must use Cynthia testing for 508C. And, it's one step closer to more accessible sites. We are NOT done - not by a long shot - and I am very interested in seeing what you contribute, as well, as I know you are working in this area. But, we have to support one another in this journey because it's complicated, there are few of you with expert level knowledge, many of us who have to learn, and it's going to take many people working together to continue to advance.

What the developers have provided with the Template Override system has opened doors for us. Robert and Angie have done a fabulous job demonstrating how to take full advantage of those hooks to output Joomla! as needed! That is great news, Lawrence. It is a step in the right direction. I'd be very interested to have you take Robert and Angie's work -- see what you can do with it to advance it further, given the knowledge you have in this area.

I have to go work on the Wiki assignment - that's what I am supposed to be doing for the community. It's my little part. So, don't tell anyone I was in here. If we all carry a couple of rocks, we can get this done! I am expected to help. :)

Be positive. Contribute. Help show us the way. Have a nice beer. Later...Amy :)

_________________
http://Twitter.com/AmyStephen
http://www.alltogetherasawhole.org/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 508C Compliance
PostPosted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 4:20 am 
User avatar
Joomla! Ace
Joomla! Ace

Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2005 12:37 am
Posts: 1199
Location: Melbourne, Australia
AmyStephen wrote:
Here's another great document. It is a tool of 144 pages in length. This "tool" is recommended by the US Government to be used by a) reading and then b) applying each subjective test to determine compliance.  (Unless - of course - it would impose an undue burden to do so!) It doesn't say how many of these tests must be passed or what percentage of the continuum means "passing."

It is frustrating, Lawrence. There is no right way and anyone who believes there is - is WRONG.


That's why accessibility is personalised, and cannot be reduced down to passing a simple mechanical test (contrary to the dev blog posts) In meeting the needs of people, you have to accommodate change and ambiguity, something a mechanical test can't measure (some management teams likewise can't handle change and ambiguity, but that's another issue for another day).

AmyStephen wrote:
Here's what BEEZ demonstrates. It is clear that we do not have to do core hacks to achieve 508C. We can completely control the output of Joomla! v 1.5. The Cynthia test validates tests that can be conducted electronically. We have to use guidelines from that point on because no testing can prove compliance or lack of compliance.


Except in the instance whereby the "core hacks" aka template overrides provide no appreciable difference on the same mechanical test between a modified and stock standard source. Which is what's happening in this instance. There should be advancement, even in terms of the basic mechanical test regime. There isn't.

I would have thought they'd include some basic Javascript noscript negotation, but that's being blown out of the water with stuff like Johan's "caption.js" script for image captions and the reliance on a non-depreciable solution for text resizing. JAWS negotiates it okay, not perfectly in my testing thus far. Fangs also has some issues.

As it stands, the best they can aim for is a mechanical pass on 508/ WAI A as it stands, which is no different to what Milkyway does now. They won't even be able to make a mechanical WAI AA validation, which is the current acceptable standard for those dealing primarily with professional web development, thanks to the way they designed Beez.

The fact Angie and Robert went to the effort of including access keys integrated inside the Beez template, without the Core recognising that that an accessibility policy needs to be integrated into the core (not as a separate content item and not in the content structure) to meet the basic 508 / WAI A for educating users as to what those access keys actually do is another issue in itself that needs to be addressed.

AmyStephen wrote:
This is big news for those of us who must use Cynthia testing for 508C. And, it's one step closer to more accessible sites. We are NOT done - not by a long shot - and I am very interested in seeing what you contribute, as well, as I know you are working in this area.


You don't know how long the Core has been marketing Joomla! as a web standards compliant system, even meeting 508 compliance. It started back in the Mambo days..even with the Web Standards Group discussing it. From where I stand, it's not big news.. I've heard it all before, and I actually understand what is going on instead of merely considering a new 'feature' something worthy of evangelism.

AmyStephen wrote:
But, we have to support one another in this journey because it's complicated, there are few of you with expert level knowledge, many of us who have to learn, and it's going to take many people working together to continue to advance.


The few of us that have expert knowledge are not welcome to contribute effectively. Nic left on grounds on principle and ethics. I'm not welcome to share what I have freely.

Which is why you've got a relative newbie in terms of liaising with the Web Standards Group, Barrie North, as part of the D&A team. I haven't seen Robert or Angie contribute to peer reviewed discussion regarding their work and Joomla! across the web accessibility community (say with Derek Featherstone or Molly Holzschlag) on these issues, either.

AmyStephen wrote:
What the developers have provided with the Template Override system has opened doors for us. Robert and Angie have done a fabulous job demonstrating how to take full advantage of those hooks to output Joomla! as needed! That is great news, Lawrence. It is a step in the right direction. I'd be very interested to have you take Robert and Angie's work -- see what you can do with it to advance it further, given the knowledge you have in this area.


Taking advantage of them ?

The way Beez is designed, it won't even pass a mechanical WAI AA test. And since Milkyway can pass a mechanical 508/WAI A from Cynthia and WebXact, where exactly is the advantage ? The only advantage thus far is the change from tables to tableless.  The fact the template overrides are tableless doesn't make it accessible. It may even be somewhat semantic, but it's not entirely accessible.

AmyStephen wrote:
Be positive. Contribute. Help show us the way. Have a nice beer. Later...Amy :)


Not allowed to.. Sorry, but according to sources inside this community, supposedly it's all pretence..

I wrote this a little over two years ago.. and we're still just meeting the same bar in terms of WAI and 508.

_________________
Design with integrity : Web accessible solutions
http://www.absalom.biz
http://twitter.com/absalomedia


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 508C Compliance
PostPosted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 5:11 am 
Joomla! Champion
Joomla! Champion

Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 3:35 pm
Posts: 7056
Location: Nebraska
absalom wrote:
That's why accessibility is personalised, and cannot be reduced down to passing a simple mechanical test (contrary to the dev blog posts)


Show me one core dev blog post that says accessibility can be reduced to a simple mechanical test. That is so not true, Lawrence.

absalom wrote:
Except in the instance whereby the "core hacks" aka template overrides provide no appreciable difference on the same mechanical test between a modified and stock standard source. Which is what's happening in this instance. There should be advancement, even in terms of the basic mechanical test regime. There isn't.


# 1 - Untrue! This is not a core hack - it is an override. We are not modifying core delivered code to accomplish BEEZ.
# 2 - There is no advancement in the mechanical tests because both passed the mechanical tests.  :P

# 3 - The "advancement" is simple - it's called "have it your way!" We are able to use template overrides to OVERRIDE the output, Lawrence! You can advance it how you want. This is not a difficult concept and I am certain you understand this.

absalom wrote:
I would have thought they'd include some basic Javascript noscript negotation, but that's being blown out of the water with stuff like...

Stick to the topic and quit pulling in other stuff. You are clouding a 508C / BEEZ tutorial discussion with unrelated information.  :(

absalom wrote:
As it stands, the best they can aim for is a mechanical pass on 508/ WAI A as it stands


OK. So, it passes the mechanical test. Great. Thanks for saying that FINALLY!  :)

absalom wrote:
Not allowed to.. Sorry, but according to sources inside this community, supposedly it's all pretence..


Arg! If you were standing by me, Lawrence, I would grab you by the shoulders and give you a firm, motherly shake; a hug; then an even firmer shake! 

Here's what I see with BEEZ -- people working together cooperatively, contributing code and documentation, and delivering something to a community who NEEDS it.

It's time for some reflection and soul searching and decisions, Lawrence. People can't be expected to stop their work, listen to your angry complaints, explain why they are carrying the rocks in the manner they are doing it, and keep the enthusiasm and passion needed to contribute. Especially considering they are not paid! If you can't be positive, if you can't figure out how to contribute (Read Raymond, baby, no one can stop you from contributing!), if you can't collaborate with the others working in this area, if Joomla! is not working for you, take a break and think.

I took a three month break this past fall and I highly recommend it. I needed time to sort it out. My focus is now more firmly on Joomla! -- and not so much on me, Lawrence.

Joomla! is going to help make the world a *little* better place (already does!) and Joomla! v 1.5 is going to rock. I want to be a part of that. When you are ready to set aside your own interests and patiently collaborate with others, trusting that they, too, care about the community, then you'll be ready to start contributing, again. Be forewarned, though, when that time comes, we are going to use you up!

I'm done, dear. I want NOTHING but the best for you and for Joomla!. You know that.
Amy :)

_________________
http://Twitter.com/AmyStephen
http://www.alltogetherasawhole.org/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: 508 Cheating by Joomla!
PostPosted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 6:06 am 
User avatar
Joomla! Ace
Joomla! Ace

Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2005 12:37 am
Posts: 1199
Location: Melbourne, Australia
AmyStephen wrote:
Show me one core dev blog post that says accessibility can be reduced to a simple mechanical test. That is so not true, Lawrence.


[quote="http://dev.joomla.org/component/option,com_jd-wp/Itemid,33/p,201/"]
What does this all mean? In 1.5, a designer can change every little bit of html the system generates, the standard output however is still the same as in 1.0 to retain backwards compatibility with 1.0 site templates. This allows the creation of accessible, standard compliant, tableless, whatever-the-designer-thinks-is-important, websites.

We are currently trying to create a semantic site template that will act as a proof of concept to demonstrate how people can use the new features in 1.5. The goal is also to make this template an offical package. Template designers can then use it as the basis for their own accessible and standard compliant templates. The template will be fine-tuned based on feedback gathered from the community and the idea is to move it into the core for 2.0.
[/quote]

and

[quote="http://help.joomla.org/content/view/805/60/"]
We will provide a solution capable of delivering accessible websites that comply with WCAG 1.0 Priority 2 and Section 508 requirements by release 1.5 of Joomla!

The Core Development Team focuses on front-end accessibility for the 1.x series of releases of Joomla!
Please note that while Joomla! will provide the ability to deliver WCAG compliant sites, many requirements depend on the template designers or content managers.  As such, Joomla! sites may well not comply with WCAG, for reasons out of the control of the Core Development Team.  In other words: “We’ll give you the tools to comply, the rest is up to you!”.
[/quote]

They say it will be capable for WAI AA..

AmyStephen wrote:
# 1 - Untrue! This is not a core hack - it is an override. We are not modifying core delivered code to accomplish BEEZ.


I apologise for misunderstanding regarding the 'core hack'. I thought you were treating 'core hack' as the same thing as the template overrides. The real question is - should they be modifying core code (namely the frontend JS delivered by Johan) in order to make that JS a progressive enhancement / WAI AA capable ?

AmyStephen wrote:
# 2 - There is no advancement in the mechanical tests because both passed the mechanical tests.  :P


They even managed to come up with the same warnings concerning Javascripting, ergo no advancement, Amy. You're not the first person to claim that because a CMS 'passes' a mechanical test, it's not needing to be advanced. I heard similar claims back in the Mambo days. And then there's the fact all mechanical tests can be gamed.. which is why Milkyway passes it (and likewise, Beez).

AmyStephen wrote:
# 3 - The "advancement" is simple - it's called "have it your way!" We are able to use template overrides to OVERRIDE the output, Lawrence! You can advance it how you want. This is not a difficult concept and I am certain you understand this.


So how do you override the captions.js file when it's part of the /includes directory, one of the limitations on further advancement in terms of mechanical accessibility testing to get to WAI AA, and as such, not part of the "template override" structure ? I have it on good authority from Andrew Eddie himself that the only things that can be overridden in 1.5 are the component architectures, not the includes.

AmyStephen wrote:
Stick to the topic and quit pulling in other stuff. You are clouding a 508C / BEEZ tutorial discussion with unrelated information.  :(


How to deal with Javascript correctly on a website is part of rule 6.3.1 to 6.3.4 of 1194.22 (l) of the Section 508 Compliance guidelines and as such, related to this discussion on 508 Compliance for Beez. I did quote it already for you. Here's the specific bit that matters, in case you misunderstood:

Quote:
    * Rule: 6.3.4 - When SCRIPT Elements are used, the NOSCRIPT element is required in the document.
          o Warning - SCRIPT Element(s) are found in document and the NOSCRIPT element is not.


Javascript, progressive enhancement and noscripting are part of 508 compliance..

AmyStephen wrote:
OK. So, it passes the mechanical test. Great. Thanks for saying that FINALLY!  :)


'Cept the problem is it's "gaming" the system in order to get a pass mark on that mechanical test. If you cheat on a test to get a pass mark, is that fair ?

AmyStephen wrote:
Here's what I see with BEEZ -- people working together cooperatively, contributing code and documentation, and delivering something to a community who NEEDS it.


I've contributed code, documentation, designs, architecture changes, support, discussions, ideas. I've collaborated with lots of people across the globe on various projects.

AmyStephen wrote:
It's time for some reflection and soul searching and decisions, Lawrence. People can't be expected to stop their work, listen to your angry complaints, explain why they are carrying the rocks in the manner they are doing it, and keep the enthusiasm and passion needed to contribute. Especially considering they are not paid!


I'm not angry, Amy.  You asked for an analysis and I've given it. The results of this analysis upsets the marketing / evangelism / upselling of Joomla! as Joomla! because the evidence within the analysis contradicts what is stated by the people who run the show.

Likewise, the design and analysis I've given here and elsewhere is unpaid. So there is more than one side to this story. I'm contributing as much as the next guy, the difference being what I've contributed shows where things need to change.. and not rely on marketing.

AmyStephen wrote:
Joomla! is going to help make the world a *little* better place (already does!) and Joomla! v 1.5 is going to rock. I want to be a part of that. When you are ready to set aside your own interests and patiently collaborate with others, trusting that they, too, care about the community, then you'll be ready to start contributing, again. Be forewarned, though, when that time comes, we are going to use you up!


My own interests ?  ???  I have been patiently collaborating with you. You wanted an analysis. You got the results. The results didn't exactly gel with what you and others have been evangelising for Joomla!.. and in that light, it's perfectly understandable and logical that you would respond to me the way you have. I'm okay with that.

Merely because we happen to disagree doesn't mean we remain unable to collaborate, share and advance this product. I do hope you recognise this... because otherwise it comes down to a misunderstanding on the fact Section 508 clearly states there are requirements for Javascript, based on your own understanding that:
Quote:
I have evaluated the BEEZ template with the base Joomla! install and - I'll be tickled pink if that thing doesn't pass the standards. Good news for us, Lawrence!


You thought it passed because the mechanical test said it did. Yet that's not the point of the test. Accessibility is not aiming for 'compliance' so organisations can sign off on it, accessibility is aiming for meeting the needs of people.  All I'm trying to do is educate you to the point that whatever is inside that mechanical test, is by and large, wrong if it says Joomla! passes the test.  I don't want the friends and colleagues I have within the Joomla! community to misunderstand me on this point either.. which is why I'm wondering why we can't patch up this misunderstanding here and now.

_________________
Design with integrity : Web accessible solutions
http://www.absalom.biz
http://twitter.com/absalomedia


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 508C Compliance
PostPosted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 3:09 pm 
Joomla! Champion
Joomla! Champion

Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 3:35 pm
Posts: 7056
Location: Nebraska
Lawrence -

#1. That first section about the core dev post does not prove your point. Of course there is effort in creating accessible sites. The blog post you are quoting says We’ll give you the tools to comply, the rest is up to you!. You accused them of saying "accessibility can be reduced to a simple mechanical test." Not even hardly close. The devs have opened the door so that we can generate the output. That freedom empowers skilled people to do what they want with the output of Joomla!. That is all those posts are saying and it is true! And, if you don't believe the blog and think it's marketing hype, no problem. The truth is in the SVN - and Angie and Robert are demonstrating it for us with BEEZ and Barrie is demonstrating it for us with his tutorials. Thank you to the developers. Thank you, Angie. Thank you, Robert. Thank you, Barrie.

#2. Listen up! Calling someone's contributed efforts "gaming" is insulting, Lawrence. How would you feel if you spent months/years developing a solution - offered it freely to the world - then people call it "gaming?" Here's the danger with this type of "analysis" - it discourages contributions! We are emotional creatures. People who contribute freely in open source tend to be the kind of people who care. So, when they are accused of such things, they drop what they are doing to defend themselves. OK, now, what happened to the work they were doing? Well, it's not progressing anymore. Why? Well, because these people are now working on a rebuttal to the claim that they are gaming the system. They are hoping to protect their reputation against such smear campaigns! After dozens of these types of attacks, many will decide that they've had it and walk away from our community because doing work for free for people who attack them is not their idea of a good investment of time. STOP!

#3. You have INDEED contributed, Lawrence. In fact, you used to be a leader in this area. But, for many reasons we need not go into, at this point in time, you are not getting good traction. You are engaged in many disagreements. You are struggling with plugging back in and becoming productive, again. There is plenty of blame to go around and I believe it to be a community failing rather than an individual failing. The thing is this, Lawrence, only you can figure out the way back in and that is where the soul searching comes in. I understand. Trust me. I accept you as you are Lawrence. But, you have to find a place to contribute and you must stop evaluating everyone else's work as "not good enough." It is not helping - it is discouraging to those who are contributing. In the end, it is code produced, not analysis, that gets installed on servers.

++++

If accessibility is of interest, then contribute in that area. You do not have to be on a working group to do that. Take Joomla! v 1.5, the tools we have been provided and apply your knowledge in this area to advance us further. If your heart is intent upon helping the community provide improved services for those with disabilities, then put your time into making Joomla! work for that segment of our world. Bring in something that is usable by the community.

You will find your voice has much more power if you can:

1) Leave it behind. All of it. Look ahead.
2) Offer working code to supplement your analysis.
3) Adapt to the existing Joomla! v 1.5 framework and seek minimum changes needed to achieve your goals.
4) Adopt the "journey" versus "destination" mindset when it comes to progress.
5) Commit to the community and recognize others care about these goals.
6) Applaud and celebrate contributions of others within the community.

I gave you this time because I care about you, Lawrence. But, I allowed myself to get off-track, again. That's all I can give right now.

All together, As a whole,
Amy :)

_________________
http://Twitter.com/AmyStephen
http://www.alltogetherasawhole.org/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 508C Compliance
PostPosted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 4:17 pm 
User avatar
Joomla! Enthusiast
Joomla! Enthusiast

Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2005 8:01 am
Posts: 221
Location: Germany Bonn
Hey,

I couldn't understand all your criticism, because  my english isn't good
enought.Please use short and comprehndible sentences, so it's more easy for me.

( Look WVAG Guideline 14.  Ensure that documents are clear and simple.  ) ;)

Accessibility can't put in rules like checked or not checked.
The guideline are helpful, but to execute only this guideline isn't enought.
You need user tests also and you have to learn how to interpret these
guidelines.

To Laurence:
There are so many different concepts about accessibility.
And your concept mustn't be the best one.
For example look at the WCAG 2 Draft and the article from Joe Clark.
I think you know this one.

As regards your criticism about the template not meeting 11.94.22 with
regard to  text resizer you refer to your own competence as an accessibilty consultant.
That's fine, but other people have made their own experiences and build their own competences.

Normally people, who need to in-/decrease the text size, use the text resizer which is implemented in the browser ore some special tools for very large enlargements.

It's my position as an accessibility consultant that this Javascript Resizer is sort of
progressive enhancement for people, who don't know how to use the built in facility - older people or very inexperienced ones for example. But these people usually don't know how to disable Javascript, too. Of course we could write the whole resizer thing with javascript, so that users who don't have Javascript wouldn't even see the resizer.
This would fulfill your condition - but would this be a gain for accessibility?


You wrote:
All I'm trying to do is educate you to the point that whatever is inside
that mechanical test, is by and large, wrong if it says Joomla! passes the
test.


By writting this you basically tell us that automatic 508 tests are not only
flawed, but entirely useless and that the only thing counting is your very personally opinions.

That's quite ridiculous  and  you can't expect us to discuss matters  on
these conditions.
Automatic tests surely are not enough, but they are the first-line agreement.

And  believe me, Beez  was checked by handicapped persons allready.

To the others:
I'm not that person, who talks and discusses all the time , because if I did, we had not any template to criticize yet.
Im working in the background and have spent a lot of time  to convince people
that we need a template for joomla that gives a sound foundation for standards compliant and accesible sites.
Here it is - it is an important step in the right direction, but it is beta, and I am grateful for constructive criticism.
The community will be helpfull to find any mistakes that are left. But I don't need self established experts telling me only their ideas are relevant.

As regards my own experiences and competences in accessibility, those who read German may have a look in a book on exactly this topic I wrote last year and that got quite good critics. I'm no beginner in this field, and I certainly do not appreciate the condescening and patronizing tone of Laurences criticism.

Questions like "why is it not better than Milky Way?", do not help to make the template better, they are destructive and unfriendly.

Greeting Angie

_________________
ausdrucks|Stark
Büro für Kommunikation Angie Radtke
http://www.der-auftritt.de
Blog: http://www.der-auftritt.de/wissen.html


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 508C Compliance
PostPosted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 6:12 pm 
User avatar
Joomla! Enthusiast
Joomla! Enthusiast

Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2005 8:01 am
Posts: 221
Location: Germany Bonn
http://dev.joomla.org/component/option, ... /#comments


Bye Angie

_________________
ausdrucks|Stark
Büro für Kommunikation Angie Radtke
http://www.der-auftritt.de
Blog: http://www.der-auftritt.de/wissen.html


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 508C Compliance
PostPosted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 6:52 pm 
Joomla! Champion
Joomla! Champion

Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 3:35 pm
Posts: 7056
Location: Nebraska
a.radtke wrote:


FABULOUS!!!! Eva's comments are very, very positive. So glad she provided feedback as she is indeed one you are trying to reach.

Angie - lead on!  :-*

_________________
http://Twitter.com/AmyStephen
http://www.alltogetherasawhole.org/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 508C Compliance
PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 6:10 am 
Joomla! Intern
Joomla! Intern

Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 10:01 am
Posts: 55
To be fair to absalom, and perhaps there's some history I have no idea about, but his comments appear perfectly reasonable and logical. And I cerrtainly don't read much negativity into his posts, but a reasonable response to an issue.

Just my 2c. ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group