2 Nov
2009
2 Nov
'09
10:45 a.m.
Hi Vincent,
This would be for us a real improvement since we had already hack
XWiki to have it more accessible than it was for a previous client,
and we will audit and improve that effort soon, when we will upgrade
that client to your latest release (or at least 1.9 depending on
timeframe).
The fields that we have worked on is improving navigation of a page
without style, ensuring as best as we could proper reading of the page
by readers for disabled peoples. Mostly, this had required a patch in
the way object fields are displayed, and many small adjustment in the
velocity templates (using a custom skin and some direct patch). Of
course, we have not produced a full XWiki compliant solution, but the
public part of our site is known to be accessible. You can see it
there: http://elsaccessible.com
For those who are afraid to limit your ability to develop cool stuffs,
I would remind that complying with the rules mainly means providing an
accessible solutions to all parts and functions of site (as much as
possible), but does not refrain you to provide an event better and
more enjoyable solution to non-disabled peoples. This also means,
using the coolest and latest web standards to ensure that !
As a contributor, here is my big +1 :)
Denis
On Oct 28, 2009, at 20:41, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi devs,
We've always tried to follow standards in the XWiki project. I'd like
to propose that we start adhering to the WCAG ones to make XWiki even
more accessible.
The reason I'm proposing this is because XWiki SAS has been contacted
by some Dutch organization promoting the usage of standards in
Netherlands and they're interested in using XWiki for their site. As
such they need that the wiki they use also follows the guidelines...
They've found XWiki since it was one of the wikis out there that
follows most closely the guidelines.
This is our opportunity to meet the WCAG guidelines and go even beyond
(since the Dutch guidelines go slightly further I believe, see
http://www.webrichtlijnen.nl/english/guidelines/
)
. We would be the first wiki to meet this!
If we agree we'll need to find some ways to automate the execution of
the verifications. Right now we can test pages using this validator:
http://www.webrichtlijnen.nl/english/test/
I've started verifying this page:
http://playground.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/
Result:
http://www.webrichtlijnen.nl/english/test/report/74721/179372/
Some examples of failing stuff:
1) Style attribute forbidden. Everything from CSS.
Ex from home page:
<div id="globallinks"> <form
action="/xwiki/bin/view/Main/WebSearch"
style="margin: 0; padding: 0;"> <div id="globalsearch">
<input
id="globalsearchinput" type="text" name="text"
value="search..."
size="15" class="withTip"/><input class="button"
value="Go"
type="image" src="/xwiki/resources/icons/xwiki/search.png"/>
</div> </
form> </div>
...
<div class="hidden" id="spSpaceCreateForm"><form
action="/xwiki/bin/
view/Main/?xpage=create" method="post"> <div> <input
name="tocreate"
type="hidden" value="space"></input> <input
class="panelinput"
name="title" onblur="if(this.value=='') this.value='Space
name'"
onfocus="if(this.value=='Space name') this.value=''"
style="margin:auto;" type="text" value="Space
name"></input> <input
type="submit" value="Create"></input> </div>
</form> </div>
...
<p style="font-size:0.75em;padding-left:8px;"><a
href="/xwiki/bin/
inline/Panels/QuickLinks">(Edit this panel)</a></p>
2) Need to run CSS Level 2.1 validation. Lots of error. For ex on home
page: http://bit.ly/4x9YlM
3) Apparently we made a mistake by choosing to have 2 H1 (one for
title and for headers). "The document hierarchy contains more that one
h1 tags .".
Before going further I'd like to ensure that we all agree to follow
these guidelines and put in our best practices (and ensure we verify
with some automated tests later on).
Here's my +1
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs