wc3 compliant websites?

[danf]

anybody explain in laymans term what these are and how important they are please?

[MSOMedia]

Hi! I might be able to shed some light on this.

W3C compliance means that a website obeys the rules laid out by the World Wide Web Consortium. They have a whole bunch of rules about how a website should be coded, how accessible it should be, what you do with images, etc. If you comply with their most basic of rules (valid HTML) you get a logo which you can stick on your site. This logo says that your site is valid, and doesn't have any problems. Probably about 30 to 40% of sites have errors in their HTML, and alsmot all of their respective developers will be unaware of this because they look OK in Internet Explorer.

If it's of any help, I wrote an article about compliance for my weekly newsletter. The first part should be of use to you if you're looking into W3C stuff.

http://www.msomedia.com/results/gr00005.htm

Let me know if I can be of any more help.

[danf]

am now enlightened, thanks mark.

[MichaelG]

Probably about 30 to 40% of sites have errors in their HTML, and alsmot all of their respective developers will be unaware of this because they look OK in Internet Explorer

umm interesting statement - where did you get these figures from?

Don't blame the website developers - blame the browser developers. If the browsers followed the standards - then we won't have to test or create browser specific css/templates for each bloody browser out there!

[creospace]

Michael I partly agree with you but there is no excuse for sloppy code!

I made the step a few months ago to make sure everything I code is to xhtml standards. Clients or potential clients don't yet understand why this is important. I just wish more was done to highlight this 'cause' as it was because at this time all web designers get thrown into the same bucket.

I've also applied to the RNIB to get the 'See it Right' accreditation for accessibility. I'm not sure if I will get any more business because of it. But I do think that designers that purposely build in accessibility and compliance should some how be registered as doing so. I wouldn’t even mind paying to join such a register?

Also I think the percentage of non-complaint sites is far far higher than 30-40%. I don’t want to get anal about it but I can't wait for IE 7 to come out and the badly done sites will not render correctly.

Oust the sloppy coders

Gary

[creospace]

That's random I just noticed Michael’s company is called creotec and mine creospace, total coincidence!

Gary

[Richard Conyard]

Gary,
See it right can only be got for an individual website rather than a qualification.

On a side note I often post over at http://www.accessifyforum.com where there is a site critiques section if you feel brave enough to take any critisism ;-), also if anyone wants some quick pointers I don't mind taking the odd 5 minutes out.

[MSOMedia]

Same here for that matter. I registered a while back with the Disability Rights Commission's Open4All (http://www.drc-gb.org/open4all/) programme - just registering my support really, as I'm severely partially sighted and thought I'd fly the flag!

[creospace]

All advice welcomed, I know the SIR is just for my sight but if the designer hasn't bothered to do his/their own site then I don’t see why they can say they can do others? I've gone through the check list for SiR as best I can and I hope addressed the priority 1 items, I have to say that some things seemed accessibility gone OTT but still it was noted.

I've sent the form in and I’m awaiting a cost and a time when they will do it, of course my site is tiny compared to what they have done.

My attention was drawn to it because I watched a documentary on blind and deaf people getting on with life and their struggles. It was that that made me realise I should do more to at least make my site accessible and raise the issue with clients etc.

Of course clients don’t want costs to raise just to be accessible if there was more awareness of this it would make the designers life a bit better maybe.

What can be done to highlight this issue with designers etc?

Gary

[Enigma121]

All advice welcomed, I know the SIR is just for my sight but if the designer hasn't bothered to do his/their own site then I don’t see why they can say they can do others?

Hummm, this is a bit of a generalisation. :?

Our site met W3C Web Content Accessibility level 1 up until a few months ago. We added a link exchange banner which breaks these guidelines and lost this status. :(

We understand the issue of accessibility, but also need to attract customers. Most potential customers unfortunately don't understand accessibility but respond well to advertising. :wink:

I feel that we are capable of delivering accessible content if the customer requests this. We are also capable of delivering a less accessible site at low cost if this is the customer's main requirement.

I agree this isn't the case for many of our competitors, but would suggest that there may be other reasons why a web design site is not fully accessible.

The level of awareness industry wide needs to be much higher. It seems at the moment web designers know about this, but until customers are DEMANDING compliant sites the cost of producing compliant content isn't justified - customers always look for the cheapest option (see the £250 for a website thread).

[creospace]

At the risk of sounding like the 'Standards police' shouldn’t we as an industry be doing compliancy as a matter of course rather then an option? I wouldn’t want to force it upon anyone but it's a sign of professionalism, ok there are shed loads of people claiming to do web design and they aren't fussed about compliancy but then there are plenty of rogue builders out there too!

I mean once you've done a few it's actually easier I think using css (for instance) rather than tables etc?

It's rather like selling cars without MOTs, ok they are cheaper but not compliant :wink:

Gary

[Richard Conyard]

I think the trouble is there isn't any UK web design body that will ratify design companies.

Clients see internals of the site as a load of hocus pocus, and normally don't want it to be explained to them. This and the prevelancy of easy to use design tools means that a lot of people can pass off as good designers and the client is unaware until they either receive a shoddy end product or someone that knows points it out to them.

[Enigma121]

No, I think you are missing my point here folks. The client may or may not understand the difference with an accessible site.

Either way, generally they simply don't want to pay lots for software as they don't understand it - it's not tangible like a book or a car where you can see the quality level right away.

Enforcing standards on developers isn't the answer. It just cuts the web developer's margin and ultimately leads to even lower quality product.

We need customers that are aware of accessibility, understand the benefits of it to their business and are prepared to spend a little more for a site with a higher level of compliance.

Another solution is for the govenment to kick companies with sites that are not compliant, thereby bring the issue onto the corporate radar.

The MOT analogy is very good, because the end user has to fork out regularly to get the car tested and fixed up, not the garage!!!

[creospace]

I partially agree with what your saying, especially your last 2 paragraphs, of course that’s a dream that the government will do that. I guess in doing tha 'web designers' that didnt want to comply would jsut melt away.

There is still no excuse for sloppy code, and if your using dreamweaver or some other product then that’s your problem really, get into a bit of hand coding rather than relying on your wysiwyg editor.

You can still do great design and be compliant, of course beauty is in the eye of the beholder!

Like your analogy of the car the danger is often hidden on the outside it looks great!

I'm a FF user but when IE7 is released most of the shoddy coding will show (providing they do sort the rendering problems) there are cases already I’ve read about on other forums through beta testing.

Gary

[Richard Conyard]

I'm waiting for the first case to be brought against a website under the DDA.

I think we'll soon see a scrambling to sort things out then.

[Enigma121]

By the government I'm really referring to our legal system. All that it really takes is a single high profile prosecution for failing to provide accessible web services. Then the landscape will really change.

We have always and will always hand code our sites as this provides the very best in quality control. The issue in our case came in when we introduced someone else's code (a banner exchange).

Can't really take it away as it's having a positive effect on our pagerank and visitor count. I'm trying to get the underlying code fixed through the banner exchange "administrator".

It's not always easy to control the code make use of, particularly when using external services, it highlights the problem of low accessibility standards in general is very widespread.

[Enigma121]

Out of interest, the banner exchange we use (co-op network) is now fixed and passing the accessibility tests as expected.

If anyone is interested in joining this banner network BTW, PM me for full details. It can really boost the exposure of your site (free of charge of course).