Ok, here's quite a strange one and I definitely had no idea where to post it!

 

I'm currently working for a College and one of the higher powers has started moaning about Web Standards with the Website. As of now, the site is valid XHTML 1.0 and CSS Level 2.1 but he's still not happy. Note, I've not seen any Colleges round here even with this. Anyway, he's thrown another spanner in the works with regard to Level Double AA Conformance. To be honest, I'd never even heard of this but he's started throwing his weight around demanding all these standards. I wouldn't mind if the Web team would have had full control (design included) from the start but, as usual, the upper management got involved and specified how they wanted it to work (and look - awful). By the way, the website is quite large (~140 pages I think) and it was done with Joomla.

 

Can anyone advise how we can get this site to this standard.

 

This is a link saying that we don't conform but it doesn't really help things. The address of the College site is here.

 

Can anyone offer any advice? This is the last thing I want to get involved with right now but I guess it needs sorting.

 

Thanks in advance

Having a site validate to w3c doesn't mean that it is accessible to people, some of the worst coded sites in the world could validate as validation isn't that special it just checks some basic things that you should do anyway.

 

Look at your code for that site it is such a mess a mash of divs and nested tables. May I ask why you are using tables in such an awful way? Screenreaders will have such a hard time reading through that mess and that is mainly why you are failing on accessibility. If you can code using css why are you adding all those tables to your design, strip it back and just use css for your layout, for such a simple layout you shouldn't have so much code. Remember two things, that tables are for tabular data and if you want to comply to standards you have to look at more than just if your site validates you have to look at how the site functions and how the code is written.

 

Once you have cleaned up the code, there will probably still be a couple of issues but I think tackling the clean up first will help us see what these other issues are...good luck

It looks like a fair amount of your accessibility "errors" (I can't really justify calling them errors...) can be easily fixed, depending of course, on how many of them result from code generated by Joomla

The thing is, do your management realise that if they insist on using Joomla they are going to get a behemoth of a pain in the ar$e website.

I understand how these corporate structures are a recipe heartache in a job like ours, but you may have to call a meeting, depending on the full list of accessibility issues to explain that it's not as simple as "I want XYZ and ABC, and I want it on Joomla". A complete rebuild may be the only answer.

 

Very good luck to you...

 

@Dizi - I think Joomla is responsible for the Table/ Div mashup

The Double A standard means you comply to all Priority 1 and Priority 2 standards as set out in the guidelines

 

It's going to be tough to do in joomla I think...but you need to identify what is causing the *errors* and you may be able to find work arounds.

@Dizi - I think Joomla is responsible for the Table/ Div mashup

 

 

The couple of times I have used joomla I have never had a horrid mashup its always been all divs.

Thanks for the replies guys. My god, I didn't use all those tables, haha - it's just the way Joomla has been working. I've helped out with the site but as I said before, all design flair gets sapped at the beginning from the senior management in a horrible effort to have some kind of boring corporate look, needless to say I just stepped back from the design and let this awful site come along. You can see from the site in my sig that I know what I'm doing with CSS and design but there's not much that I can put into this as I said. Joomla is a pain in the ass but they wanted a site with a management system like that so that was what the team decided on. Initially it seemed like a good idea but it's only when you get going you realise what a mess it really is. The template used with Joomla was a complete mess to start with and it's took quite a bit of work to even validate it to the level it is now.

 

Can anyone offer any advice and I can pass it on. This 'board member' is throwing all of these standards at us and nobody is even sure what is set in stone. Do College's have to be Double A compliant? Somebody told us that all Colleges HAVE to comply with the two W3C standards that we've got but by looking at nearly all other College sites we know, none of them are. He was very arrogant in saying that this team could not resolve the problems but within 4 hours we'd sorted a few hundred stupid errors to get the validation as it is now (and get those stupid icons on the home page). We've got a feeling this guy has too much time on his hands and is just trying to bring something to the table, so to speak.

 

Thanks

but you need to identify what is causing the *errors* and you may be able to find work arounds.

 

There are so many validation pages online, the ones we have found don't really show the errors so the team haven't really got anything to work with...

I know this is much more work but,

 

The guidelines set everything out. So you could surely create a checklist based on it?

Highlight anything you know you haven't done, and anything you think might be the problem and start from the worst ones?

 

The problem is that it is quite open to interpretation, so you need to use a bit of discretion.

I know this is much more work but,

 

The guidelines set everything out. So you could surely create a checklist based on it?

Highlight anything you know you haven't done, and anything you think might be the problem and start from the worst ones?

 

The problem is that it is quite open to interpretation, so you need to use a bit of discretion.

 

Thanks for your reply. Well, well we had to get it working with the two W3C standards, the website just showed us the errors and we worked on them from there. We can't seem to find anything showing the problems (otherwise I know I could have sorted them). All I see is random guidelines here and there, it seems a little over the top really. One of the managers is even talking about having to completely re-do the website to get this in with the AA compliance - it's madness.

On that link I sent you, click the link to 6. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines

 

It then lists 14 guidelines, each with related checkpoints. In order to be Double A you must meet ALL checkpoints marked Priority 1 or Priority 2.

 

It isn't the most well organised document or standard ever, but this is what Double A is!

It would be so much better as a PDF with check boxes so you could tick things off, but I haven't found anything like that.

On that link I sent you, click the link to 6. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines

 

It then lists 14 guidelines, each with related checkpoints. In order to be Double A you must meet ALL checkpoints marked Priority 1 or Priority 2.

 

It isn't the most well organised document or standard ever, but this is what Double A is!

It would be so much better as a PDF with check boxes so you could tick things off, but I haven't found anything like that.

 

Ok - thanks for that. I'll have a good look through those guidelines. I wish I never got involved...

There is also this HORRIFIC document on techniques.

 

http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20080430/

 

Cookies available for anyone who reads it.

There is also this HORRIFIC document on techniques.

 

http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20080430/

 

Cookies available for anyone who reads it.

 

- I hope it doesn't get so bad that I have to read that!

Do you have any students at the college with disabilities that could test the current site for you? This might be a good way to spot things that need ugent attention.

Do you have any students at the college with disabilities that could test the current site for you? This might be a good way to spot things that need ugent attention.

or just go download a few screen readers and any other related programs and see where they mess up.

Try this website http://www.tawdis.net it tells you what the problems are.

 

Of coarse it's no substitute for testing with a screen reader, but hopefully you'll be able to get it to validate and get that numpty off your back.