W3C logoWeb Accessibility Initiative (WAI) logo > EOWG Home Page

Requirements for Before/After Site

This is an outdated draft. The latest version is available at http://www.w3.org/WAI/demos/bad/.

Purpose

Audiences (and their specific purposes)

Approach

Scope

Name

This section needs more brainstorming...

Structure

  1. Overview Page
    1. describes purpose and contents of resource suite
    2. gives very brief outline of the process, with annotated pointers to the sub-pages
    3. provides pointers to related WAI resources (e.g., Evaluation Resource Suite; Retrofitting Web Sites for Accessibility; etc.)
  2. Bad Site ["Inaccessible Site"] -- four pages in all, as follows, in HTML
    1. Navigation Page (NAV)
      • Frames use fixed pixel sizes to define layout
      • Links are not structured using lists or other elements
      • Links are actually javascript functions (instead of using events)
      • Roll-over effect is provided through the scripts (not through CSS)
      • Client-side image map w/ no alt or areas
    2. Welcome Page (HME)
      • Company logo has wrong alt attribute (for example explaining the contents of the logo)
      • Name of the Web site as text-image and not marked as h1
      • Pictures without alt attributes or longdesc descriptions
      • News items with "click here" type of links
      • floating DIVs for layouting with absolute sizes and bad reading order
      • News items do not linearize well through the DIVs structure
      • Page has invalid HTML code (missing DOCTYPE etc)
    3. Data Page (DAT)
      • One or two tables with different complexity
      • Table markup is wrong (for example no headers, summaries, etc)
      • Incorrect usage of TDs that render visually but not on some ATs
      • One or two Figures/charts with no alt or longdesc attributes
      • (Wishlist: sound or video file explaining content but has no transcription/captions)
    4. Forms Page (APP)
      • Misused labels (for visual effect or for one of a group of controls not marked as fieldset)
      • Input controls aligned using fixed size layout table
      • Input controls and captions do not linearize well
      • Submit is done through javascripts functions
      • Error messages ask to fill inputs marked with red
      • Error messages are difficult and confusing
  3. Evaluation Report on Bad Site
    1. Would reference the Evaluation Resource Suite
    2. Would be formatted according to the Template for Accessibility Evaluations
    3. Content could include: moving up to XHTML once CMS supports it
  4. Retrofitting Plan for Bad Site
    1. Would reference Retrofitting Web Sites for Accessibility, the techniques documents and the online curriculum
    2. Would list a brief retrofitting plan for the site, listing priorities, order of repairs, etc
    3. Content could mention stages, including later move up to XHTML
  5. Good Site ["Accessible Site" or "Retrofitted Site"] in HTML
    1. Would be the same set of pages and same default appearance as the "bad site" above
    2. Would implement all the recommendations in the retrofitting plan, above

Editors: Judy Brewer, Shadi Abou-Zahra

Last updated: 1 July 2005

Copyright 1994 - 2005 W3C (MIT, ERCIM, Keio ), All Rights Reserved. W3C liability, trademark, document use and software licensing rules apply. Your interactions with this site are in accordance with our public and Member privacy statements.