Testing Web sites for accessibility

The same Web site can look and "feel" very different depending on...

platform/output device (Examples: PC, Macintosh, Unix, Cell Phone, PDA, etc.)
browser (Examples: Internet Explorer, Netscape Communicator, Opera, Lynx, screen-reader, etc.)
browser setting (Examples: text size, use of own style sheet, etc.)

Testing a Web site on different platforms and with different browsers, such as Microsoft Internet Explorer and Netscape Communicator is not enough. An accesible Web site needs to be tested with additional browsers and adaptive technologies. There are some cool and easy to use accessibility tools available.

Testing with browsers and adaptive technologies

Firefox Web Developer Toolbar: Use the Firefox Web Developer Toolbar to evaluate Web sites. Examples: View a site without style sheets, validate a site's HTML and CSS, or quickly view a site's structure.
The Opera browser: The Opera browser is also a great tool to evaluate the accessibility of a Web site. View a Web site in different user modes. Examples: Emulate a text-browser, view images and text only, or view a site with high contrast.
Lynx, a text-only browser: Go to Lynx Viewer to view a Web site in a text-mode or download their browser
Window Eyes screen-reader: Dowload a free trial version of Window Eyes which operates for 30 minutes each time you start the program.

Testing with accessibility tools

The Wave: The Wave returns a copy of a Web page with added icons, notations, and borders, empowering Web designers to evaluate their pages on the fly.
Cynthia Says: Cynthia Says tests for Section 508 or W3C WCAG 1.0 Accessibility Guidelines and provides feedback that is easy to understand.

Testing manually

Accessibility tools can check for compliance with the Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1998. However, these validation tools can not assess the entire Web page but only individual elements of it. They are automated instruments looking for ALT tags in images etc. But tools can not tell if the text descriptions are meaningful. Therefore, it is inevitable to have certain "check points" confirmed and other accessibility issues, such as contrast between the text color and background color, evaluated manually.