UC Davis Evaluation of Deque RAMP and Worldspace

Evaluation of RAMP and Worldspace

• Purpose is to share the tools with other developers or are the tools to be used for campus management/monitoring of the accessibility of campus Web sites?
• How does the promotion, adoption and use of the tools begin?
• How to train users/developers? What training materials will be used?

1. UCOP provides/recommends one tool to use.
2. UCOP buys/supplies the tool to the campus'.

Our Findings

• How good a job does the product do? If a page scanned "passes," then did it really?
• How do we know if the tool is 100% compliant? Must we run multiple tools to verify?
• How to determine what identified issues really are when Deque indicates there is an issue?
• Needs to be more configurable
• User reporting
• Documentation is poor
• User interface is cumbersome
• Many features are buggy
• Remediation wizard cannot fix one issue/error all at once.

Free Tools Tested/Recommended

• Total Validator
• Webaim WAVE
• CSU uses Highsoft

Lessons Learned and Recommendations (per Bea Deering 11/16/09)

1. As a result of this testing experience, for what purposes do you find testing tools especially valuable? For example, one participant said the reports are useful in educating her management about accessibility.

2. What next steps would you recommend for the University (select all that apply)?

• RFP process
• Negotiated pricing for several tools
• Specific recommendations for free tools for the UC community

3. What support / tools / community do you need to further Web accessibility in your organization (unit, dept, campus...)?