[Athen] Interesting New story

[John Foliot - Stanford Online Accessibility Program]

Ron Stewart wrote:

> After having conversations with several folks in the know, who also

> share my concerns, this product typically results in segregationist

> practices of access.  That is a step backward in the minds of many of

> those who have worked in this field for an extended period of time. 

> That is the basis of my concerns, that and the promises made and

> never delivered reality of how Hi-Soft chooses to do typically do

> business.      


Ron,

You, as I, are entitled to an opinion, and a frank and open airing of these
opinions can be a benefit to any list member who wishes to weigh the pros
and cons. Having worked in the web accessibility field for over 8 years now,
I am hardly a neophyte when it comes to this topic. Your suggestion that the
implementation of a QA tool that when used properly can be of great
assistance, is a "step backward" is opinionated hyperbole that should be
recognized as such.  Please, if you wish to contribute to the general body
of knowledge, explain your concern: what exactly does using this tool do
that creates "...segregationist practices...", and then please explain how
the tool (as opposed to an ill-informed or improperly trained operator)
causes this problem.

*In Your Opinion* HiSoftware's sales practices go against your grain, that's
fair, but I also have first hand knowledge that the company consists of
caring and reasonable people who have accessibility concerns in their
agenda.  Mr. Yonaitis has given freely of his time and knowledge for many
years, and HiSoftware hosts and funds the "Cynthia Says" online tester,
which, while not perfect, has done a lot to inform and aid beginning web
authors seeking to create accessible content.  

Slavish reliance on any one tool can be dangerous, as with only one hammer,
everything becomes a nail.  But the tool can be a valuable asset in the
hands of informed developers and educators, and your continued insistence
that it is somehow "evil" is simply not fair.

Respectfully,

JF
---
John Foliot 
Academic Technology Consultant 
Stanford Online Accessibility Program
http://soap.stanford.edu
Stanford University
560 Escondido Mall 
Meyer Library 181 
Stanford, CA 94305-3093 
Tel: 650-862-4603




> Ron Stewart

> 

> -----Original Message-----

> From: athen-bounces at athenpro.org [mailto:athen-bounces at athenpro.org]

> On Behalf Of John Foliot - Stanford Online Accessibility Program 

> Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 10:49 AM

> To: 'Access Technologists in Higher Education Network'

> Subject: Re: [Athen] Interesting New story

> 

> Ron Stewart wrote:

>> Morning,

>> We have talked about automated web compliance tools in the past, but

>> this article I find bothersome since I feel it is a major step

>> backwards on accessibility in what I was hoping was going to be a

>> progressive approach to systemic access.

>> http://business.itbusinessnet.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=115414

>> This is a great tool in an informed hand, but in the wrong hands it

>> is a disaster as many of us have seen. Ron

> 

> Attn: Chicken Littles on this list,

> 

> Those in the know already understand the issues with automated

> testing. Yet, this article clearly indicates that, "...HiSoftware's

> solutions are part of our multi-prong strategy for checking the

> accessibility of Web sites in a scalable manner." [David Ernst, CIO

> and Assistant Vice Chancellor of Information Technology Services at

> CSU]     

> 

> "...*PART* of a multi-prong strategy..."(!!!)  Having worked with

> this tool in the past (and in the interest of disclosure I have a

> former business relationship with Hisoftware) I can assert that the

> tool can be a powerful tool for tracking and monitoring existing and

> new content.  It is not a magic bullet, nor a panacea that will

> instantly fix all problems, but it *is* a great QA tracking tool that

> can aid in identifying accessibility and compliance issues.  The tool

> combines both an automated checker as well as an "interview wizard"

> which walks content authors through the various accessibility

> checkpoints (Section 508 or WCAG) and allows them to check/test for

> compliancy.  The enterprise edition can run scheduled tests on

> multiple and disparate web sites, and forward reports to a central

> location (if desired) - allowing for example web accessibility

> specialists to identify areas of concern, and perhaps even seek out

> the "offending" author and educate them on why they have a problem

> and teach them how to fix it.              

> 

> I cannot for the life of me see how adding this QA tool to the suite

> of accessibility development assets available to CSU webmasters is a

> "backward step".  Let's be fair here...  

> 

> JF

> ---

> John Foliot

> Academic Technology Consultant

> Stanford Online Accessibility Program

> http://soap.stanford.edu

> Stanford University

> 560 Escondido Mall

> Meyer Library 181

> Stanford, CA 94305-3093

> Tel: 650-862-4603

> 

> 

> _______________________________________________

> Athen mailing list

> Athen at athenpro.org

> http://athenpro.org/mailman/listinfo/athen_athenpro.org 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> _______________________________________________

> Athen mailing list

> Athen at athenpro.org

> http://athenpro.org/mailman/listinfo/athen_athenpro.org