End of Free IE Not the End of Web Standards

The WaSP (Web Standards Project) breaks its silence over recent troubling announcements regarding Internet Explorer's future:

That Microsoft’s browsers were free in the first place is due to their overzealous competition in the browser market. Microsoft earned a conviction on antitrust violations for their actions, but it is only relevant to us insofar as it implies a greater responsibility on Microsoft’s part to support industry standards—a responsibility they have said they accept. We are holding them to their word.

RNIB redesign (again)

Well, the words on this topic on this site (and many others) certainly stirred up some 'interesting' conversation.

Now, I know that blind users don't really go much on Pocket PC devices (that whole stylus touch-screen thing just doesn't work), but it is a useful device for demonstrating how far a site owner has gone to write markup/code that is device independent. Simon Willison and Michael Davies (isolani) both put together CSS-based versions of the RNIB to show it could be done - here's Simon's, and here's Michael's. I checked Simon's version on the Pocket PC. Compare that with the RNIB's live version.

Who got the Juice?

Spotted on Juicy Studio's site today:

In an effort to find work, I've decided to start a consultancy and development company. I've tried to choose a domain name that has an association with Juicy Studio, and come up with Juicify. I'll come clean and admit it was a little inspired by Accessify, but it's quite appropriate, as it's a verb meaning to make Juicy.

It gave me a smile.

Anyway, on more serious matters, Juicy Studio have a useful new tool for you to try out - the Colour Contrast Analyser. Using this tool, you simply enter two colours (foreground and background) and the tool will calculate whether the two tones offer a high enough contrast. It's a simple tool, but does the job well. Using #fff and #fca as the two colours, the report would simply state:

The difference in brightness between the two colours is not sufficient. The threshold is 125, and the result of the foreground and background colours is 39.

The difference in colour between the two colours is not sufficient. The threshold is 500, and the result of the foreground and background colours is 136.

Do you like comments?

A simple question really - this news page used to include comments, but they were provided by a third-party system that often slowed down the page load, but we keep thinking about re-introducing comments.

Naturally, it would be great if you could say "Yes, I'd love to be able to pass comment" ... but for you to be able to do that we'd need some kind of commenting system here. Ah, the irony. So, if you find yourself wanting to have your say on these posts, drop us a line using the contact us page for the time being. We can add your comments to post manually for the time being.

Any recommendations about how we might introduce comments are also welcome. Note that the site is built using ASP and the news is powered by Blogger Pro. We do not want to rely on an Access database for these comments (if that fails, the whole news page fails), so if there is a third party system that seems pretty fool-proof and puts the comments directly on the page (rather than in a pop-up window), then we'd love to know.

Failing that, we'll just have to wait for the full launch of TypePad.

RNIB redesign does not go far enough

Well, I have to confess that I had high hopes for the new design for the RNIB's web site. The re-working is not just limited to the structure/design of the site, but also the content of the site itself:

"If you've noticed that this site looks different to the last time you visited, that's because it's a completely new website. The site has been completely redesigned to make it more accessible, easier to navigate and visually attractive, but the really big difference is that all of the information has been updated and rewritten for the web."

However, my initial reaction upon seeing the site is that they missed an opportunity. The site looks OK, but is not as graphically pleasing as it could be. You might argue that the audience doesn't require that - and I understand this completely - but it's not just blind and visually impaired users who may visit the site. This redesign gave an opportunity to show that an accessible site - and one that itself indirectly promotes the ethic of web accessibility - can be good-looking (but not necessarily in an overtly extravagant way).

Among the crimes that have been committed in this redesign are:

• A table based layout - this was the perfect opportunity to ditch a table for layout and make the site work in a PDA just as well as a fully CSS-able browser viewed on a large screen. Not only that, but the tables are quite heavily nested. Here's an actual grab of some of the source code:
             </td>
          </tr>
         </table>
        </td>
       </tr>
      </table>
     </td>
    </tr>
   </table>
  </td>
 </tr>
</table>
• Invalid or deprecated markup - a casual glance at the markup reveals that a number of attributes used are completely invalid for the doctype. Oops, did I say doctype? There wasn't one specified. Offending tags and attributes include:
  • <font> tags
  • the use of <b> tag instead of <strong> (find out what's wrong with the <b> tag here)
  • bgcolor attribute - background colours specified in table cells (surely one of the most widely supported CSS1 properties - why not use it?
• Incorrect document structure - why could I find a <h2> in the source code when there is no <h1> preceding it?
• Poor use of margins - how can it be that text butting right up against the left margin is good for visually impaired users? Margins are easy to control using CSS. The way that the text sits on the page is just poor design generally, if you ask me, let alone for people who may have difficulty viewing verticals that appear to be merging with the vertical divider immediately to the left:
  

There may be other faults with the site, but this really is little more than a cursory glance, really.

Some people may disagree with me on this. Blind people may not really give a hoot about some of the points above given that:

• they can jump around the page using hidden skip navigation links (or signposts, as the RNIB calls them) regardless of the look of the site
• it works fine in their screen reader
• the information presented is clear and easy to understand.

However, I feel that the site could have gone further. It should have been possible to make this site smaller in filesize (per page), more flexible in terms of device-independence, comformant to established standards and still serve its purpose in providing information for blind/visually impaired people (or their carers/relatives) in an attractive way. It's not the radical relaunch I was expecting. Screenshot taken 25 June 2003

Tim Roberts comments: Have to agree with you on the RNIB site. Definite anti-climax. Tips for screenreaders and many other links returned this:

Content Server Request Failed
Unable to retrieve file. The dynamic application file is not at the specified location
('d:/xpedio/weblayout/groups/public/documents/publicwebsite/xpedio/group
s/public/documents/publicwebsite/public_screentips.hcsp').

You would have thought that the RNIB would have also gone for a CSS XHTML layout considering the inherent accessibility of such techniques. They also seem to be using a CMS, but rather than just not serving up content that is not relevant (eg, for users that are logged in) they comment the code out, adding useless bandwidth to the document. Step backwards I think. God knows what they are thinking.

Other comments:

• Simon Willison
• Simon Willison's HTML4/CSS make-over
• Isolani
• Isolani's XHTML/CSS make-over
• Made For All
• Guyweb
• Tom Gilder
• Aquarionics

RNIB to relaunch their site

As reported on the E-Access Bulletin mailing list:

The RNIB is to relaunch its main web site www.rnib.org.uk next week, to make it more user-friendly for visitors with impaired vision (which, sorry to say, made this news writer chuckle slightly in a "well duh!" kind of fashion).

According to website manager Margaret O'Donnell the previous site, which went live in 1995, had grown too large and as a result contained out-of-date information and had layout inconsistencies between sections. "Before, we had a big maintenance problem with 20,000 HTML files on the site and a team of only three people." To combat this, a new accessible content management system has been installed, which has also been applied to the RNIB's intranet. The new site, which has been two years in the making, will also be easier to navigate with assistive technologies. "Better-structured documents will make it easier to read or scan with screen readers," O'Donnell said. Staff have also been trained in how to write for text-to-speech software, and other web accessibility issues including plain style and the avoidance of jargon.

The site will include information on accessing technology, with fact-sheets and resources.

Tip of the hard hat to Darren from Acquiweb for pointing out the news in the first place - thanks !

Text Email Newsletter standard ?

While looking for further details on the above news item, I stumbled across this little nugget of information at Headstar: the Text Email Newsletter standard.

To quote: This standard is designed to ease navigation of plain text email newsletters by all readers, including those using screen-readers and other special access technologies. The standard was developed by E-Access Bulletin, a free email newsletter on access to technology by visually impaired people published by Headstar with RNIB.

Comprising 18 common-sense guidelines, it's certainly not difficult to implement in your own email newsletter practices, and the fact that the RNIB was involved should give this standard some creditibility. My only concern would be that, although this document has been available since December 2002, there is still no list of organisations or individuals adhering to these guidelines. Nevertheless, even if it turns out not to be an "officially accepted" standard, the TEN outline is still worth a read.

Zeldman speaks

In case you missed it, Jeffrey Zeldman has been doing the (virtual) rounds recently, so I thought I should perhaps do a bit of catch-up and list the various interviews:

• DMX Zone's Bruce Lawson interviews the JZ
• Meet The Makers' Brian Alvey does likewise :
  • Part one - covers the world of Web standards: from The Web Standards Project to his latest book, Designing With Web Standards.
  • Part two - talks about his career leading up to the Web, his tools-of-the-trade and the unexpected rewards of publishing an independent site
• Andy King interviews Jeffrey Zeldman on Cause Campaigns

And I think that just about covers it. Something to do with a book that he's got out at the moment, apparantly.

Ian spoke ... but ran out of time

For anyone who attended the UKUPA meeting last night (topic: Web Accessibility), you will know that I came on late and, as such, didn't get time to finish my presentation. The point at which I finished was a little premature, as I didn't even get to present the summary slides. What you missed:

• Key learning points from the redesign of Nationwide 'brochureware'
• Why we failed the RNIB See-It-Right accrediation
• Practical demonstrations of testing tools (other then Watchfire/Bobby)
• Examples of good-looking and accessible sites
• Some CSS-based sites that will knock your socks off
• And finally ... a couple of howlers I found on usability sites that really should know better

I've posted the powerpoint slides on this site, but obviously you don't get the talk that goes with it, so if you have any questions about the slides, just drop me a line (ian DOT lloyd AT nationwide DOT co DOT uk).

Hopefully the fact that we were cut a little short didn't spoil the presentation as a whole. And hopefully you weren't too disappointed to discover that I am not bearded, over 50 with thinning hair and into Linux programming.

Access Keys at ALA

Alistapart (for people who make websites) is well and truly back. The latest feature is a tutorial about making your accesskeys more apparent to users with the magic of XHTML and CSS.

This site also uses accesskeys, but they are hidden - only if you hover over a link is the attribute revealed. This practice is not brilliant - we much prefer Stuart's advice about making them clearly visible, so go on over and read the article (a link to this is permanently archive here, along with a number of other useful accessibility articles).

For information, here is a handy reference list of browsers that currently support the accesskey attribute.

Useful toolbar for Netscape/Mozilla/Firebird

For my first post here, I'd like to offer just a quick heads-up to web developers using Netscape, Mozilla or (my personal favourite) Firebird for page testing: Chris Casciano's excellent XUL toolbar offers a myriad of useful functions at the click of a button.

Among the highlights:

• Links to most W3C Specifications.
• Automated submission to many validation tools.
• Resize Window to specific dimensions for testing.
• View page cookies.

Give it at try: download the pnh developer toolbar. Yes, it's not the only toolbar of its kind that's around, but I found it a touch more comprehensive than most others I've seen ... (Ian comments: "And another welcome due to Patrick - happy posting!")

Tips To Make Your Site Accessible

There's a nice Accessibility thread over at WebMaster World, head on over and check it out. That's it for now. (Ian comments: "Welcome aboard Nigel - thanks for the post!")

Glad to be here Ian, thanks for the invite. For anyone who's in the Yorkshire/Humber region of the UK there's a couple of briefings coming up from Club UK Online on the topic of "W3C, Web Standards and Accessibility" (yours truly being the presenter). Get over there if you can.

Made for June

There's a new issue of Made For All for your viewing pleasure. Included in the new issue is an article I wrote about acronyms and abbreviations (largely adapted from another page on this site that acompanies the Acrobot tool - but somewhat tweaked, added to and generally refined). Also in the same issue, Nick Kew explains how to use mod_accessibility - an Apache plug-in that automatically generates accessible markup.

Made for All also hosts a forum - something that Accessify does not have - but it could do with a few more members. There are not many discussion forums out there which are looking specifically at accessibility issues, so why not go on over and register and see if you can help build up a community?

Need a lift?

There's a well overdue (as in I've had this for 3 months now) review added on the site today for UsableNet's accessibility checker Lift. That is all.

UK Usability Professionals Association - Talk on accessibility

Next Tuesday (June 17th) I'll be speaking with Peter Bosher at the UKUPA monthly get-together on the topic of accessibility. Peter Bosher worked with the Web Accessibility Initiative of W3C in the early days of the web, and was Chairman of the British Computer Association of the Blind from 1999-2002. He will discuss some of the myths and reality around usability and accessibility, from the perspective of a real user with plenty of time for questions and discussion, to make sure that we cover issues that are of immediate concern to you.

As for me, I'll be focusing on my experiences of web accessibility in the corporate environment - the challenges that this presents, the rewards of getting it right ... and pretty much anything else related to accessibility that crops up in the time allowed. After that, it's all off to the public house to quaff some ale.

Visit the events page of the UKUPA for more information about cost, location and other such details. Maybe I'll see you there?

UK Web Accessibility Congress - University of Central England in Birmingham

The University of Central England in Birmingham is hosting a conference on Web Accessibility during the weekend of 29th-31st August. The event promises an international line up of speakers concerned with making websites accessible for all users. Among those on the list are Eric Meyer (unfortunately Eric cannot attend as planned) and Bruce Lawson, who should prove to be both entertaining and educational.

The conference cost is £240.00, including accommodation and all meals from the Friday afternoon until departure on Sunday afternoon - which seems pretty reasonable to me, and as such I'll almost certainly be attending.

Full details are on their website at http://www.cie.uce.ac.uk/ukwac, including a booking form and a full conference programme.

FrontPage 2003 to Improve Standards Support? The pigs are flying, you say?

There are semi-encouraging signs that Microsoft might be addressing one of the biggest problems with its FrontPage software - that being the dire quality of the markup that it generates. In a CNet news article entitled Microsoft aims higher with Web software, Melisa Samuelson, a Microsoft product manager is quoted as saying:

"We've heard in the past that customers felt our code wasn't transparent enough, that we generated messy code ... We've really focused on generating clean, industry-standard HTML code."

Given the number of governmental and public offices that use FrontPage as the default web authoring tool (on the basis that it's 'free' when bundled with the MS Office suite), it's especially important that the tool generates markup that complies with W3C standards (that Microsoft itself helped to define). Add to this the fact that US government agencies - many of whom will be using FrontPage - are required to make web pages comply with Section 508 accessibility guidelines, and you have even more reason to expect that the markup produced is clean and compliant.

Personally, I doubt that the quote from this MS employee will hold much water in the end. I fully expect FrontPage 2003 to create exactly the kind of markup that it always has done - proprietary, MS-oriented markup that breaks in all manner of wonderful ways in any browser other than Internet Explorer. We shall see ...

Apress to re-release 'Accessible Web Sites'

A few months back, a number of computer publishing houses went bust, among them Glasshaus, Friends of Ed and Wrox Press. One of the books that might have disappeared as a result was Accessible Web Sites, on the Glasshaus imprint, but thankfully this has been picked up by Apress who will be re-releasing it some time in July. The company already offers another book on the topic of accessibility - Accessibility for Everybody: Understanding the Section 508 Accessibility Requirements.

This is a good move, and certainly good news for all the authors concerned - Jim Thatcher, Paul Bohman, Michael Burks, Shawn Lawton Henry, Bob Regan, Sarah Swierenga, Mark D Urban and Cynthia Waddell. It's also vindication for ex-Glasshaus boss Bruce Lawson who, when proposing the book, got the reaction: "What's the second book - Web Sites for the Dead?". It just shows that there's life in this topic yet!

Watchfire join forces with Paciello Group

I nearly missed this one - and even if it is over a week old, it will still be news to a lot of people:

Watchfire Corporation has announced a partnership with The Paciello Group's (TPG) accessibility consulting practice. Beginning immediately, TPG will exclusively use Watchfire's AccessibilityXM as part of its Accessibility Audit practice. Meanwhile, Watchfire will make use of TPG's training and consulting practice to complement its technology offering. In other words - a bit of collective back scratching.

This is a good thing - despite Watchfire owning Bobby, I think that they are still relative newcomers in the field of accessibility. I've met a few people from Watchfire, and they certainly seem like they are switched on, but you can't beat practical experience. Hopefully working closely with Mike Paciello (author of Web Accessibility for People with Disabilities) and his team will enable Watchfire to improve the accessibility part of its product somewhat.

Personally speaking, I think that most of the current accessibility checkers have one common failing - and this is the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 1.0. There are so many checkpoints in these guidelines - many of which are very restrictive (to the point of being laughable, in my opinion) or so out of date that they are largely irrelevent. However - they are the only 'approved' guidelines, and as such all these programs are based on that set of rules, and everyone suffers from information overload. Hopefully the final publication of version 2.0 of these guidelines will help resolve such issues (the working draft can be found here).

In the meantime, let's hope that this partnership bears fruit - for both sides - and results in a better experience for everyone involved in wading through the mire of accessibility guidelines.

Wanted: Good lookers

I'm looking for examples of web sites that are truly accessible and usable but that do not look either like a dog's dinner or or so simple-looking that you die of boredom before leaving the first page. I know that there are plenty of web sites out there that comply to technical specifications such as CSS and XHTML, but I'm looking for examples that go beyond that:

• usable
• accessible
• validate to W3C standards
• look darn pretty too

If you have some suggestions, please drop me line giving me the URL and why you think it's so good. If I get enough, I'll put together a piece about these sites - a collective critique. Looking forward to hearing from you!

Accessibility of UK government web sites investigated

The UK's first e-Minister, Patricia Hewitt, gave a commitment in February 2001 that all new government websites should be accessible. Two years later, UK government sites are a long way from being accessible, as Accessibility of UK government web sites investigated demonstrates. This article was originally published on Juicy Studio's site but Gez Lemon has kindly let us reproduce it here for your pleasure.