Accessibility validators should make it very clear where a checkpoint is required by a standard (in which case they should provide a reference so you can check the precise wording) and where it is 'best practice' (according to who?).
In this case the 'failure' is not a non-compliance with any standard, and I would not even describe it as a 'best practice'. To be a 'best practice' there should be a consensus amongst professionals in the field that the practice is applicable in all cases where it is relevant. I have never seen this practice mentioned or discussed previously, and I am sure there will be cases where it is not necessary or desirable. Use the accessibility validators insofar as they are useful to you, but don't be a slave to them. If you learn the rationale behind all the checkpoints you will understand how to balance conflicting requirements and know when it is safe to ignore them completely. Steve -----Original Message----- From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org] On Behalf Of tee Sent: 31 December 2008 10:43 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] credibility of accessibility validator and evaluator I was testing the FAE the first time, and is questioning its report credibility because it fails my document title 50%. Not that I don't like to be wrong :) According to the report: Document Title Best Practices * The page should contain exactly one title element. * Pass: 1 title element was found. * The text content of each h1 element should match all or part of the title content. * Fail: 0% (0 out of 1) I cannot find any information about h1 content should match part or all of the title content on WCAG 2.0 guideline. There isn't guideline reference link to WCAG 2.0 official site, and I couldn't find such info on WCAG official document. Though from the SEO point of view, this 'advice' makes sense. This also makes me wonder how reliable those accessibility validators are because I get different results from Cynthia Says and Total Validators-these are the two I frequently use. Note: I am fully aware an accessible site can't just rely on validator but extra human eyes and care. tee ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ******************************************************************* ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *******************************************************************
