RE: Browsers

Your guiding light should be the accessibility standards, and your server 
stats.

While you may have personal experience with a myriad of browsers, for 
whatever reasons, your site's accessibility should be addressed according 
to standards, and the browsers hitting your site.  After all, what is the 
point testing a site against a minority browser where you have no stats 
that anyone (other than you and a few friends) indicate it is being used to 
view your site?

Best you build your site according to the web accessibility standards and 
then test that site with browsers making a significant hit rate to your 
site.  You could set an arbitrary minimum number of different browsers to 
test (say the top five) regardless of total hit rate, or a hit rate (i.e., 
testing all browser versions hitting your site above that hit 
rate).  Naming browsers based on personal preference and then using that 
list to test a site is excluding one basic fact - the users!

Kukla


At 11:06 PM 1/23/02 +0000, Nicky Danino wrote:
>Hi everyone
>
>I am glad this list got fired up again, I had forgotten I signed up.
>
>I know someone (Mike?) spoke about browsers a few messages ago but I have 
>a question about them.
>
>If I wanted to test my website for accessibility, which are the top 5 
>access methods (ie browsers) that I should use.
>
>I have IE, NN, SimplyWeb, PWwebspeak, HomePage Reader, Opera, ECast?? (or 
>something like that), and a text to speech thingy. I cannot afford Jaws, I 
>only have access to what the University provide for me.
>
>So what is everyone's top 5?
>
>Nicky
>University of Central Lancashire
>UK
>
><<< Mike Paciello <paciello(at)webable.com>  1/23 10:53p >>>
>Can I suggest that the recent Forrester Report provides compelling business
>data for supporting web accessibility....if you have an account there, you
>can download the article, "Design Accessible Sites Now".
>
>Regards,
>
>Mike
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-aware-techniques(at)hwg.org
> > [mailto:owner-aware-techniques(at)hwg.org]On Behalf Of Mike Livsey
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 5:13 PM
> > To: aware-techniques(at)hwg.org
> > Subject: Re: Hello?
> >
> >
> > According to the US Census, disabilities affect one-fifth of all
> > Americans and 1
> >
> > in 10 have a severe disability. Do these people surf the web?
> > They sure do.
> >
> > You can read the report at:
> > http://www.census.gov/prod/3/97pubs/cenbr975.pdf
> >
> > Mike Livsey
> >
> >
> >
> > Lauren Hanka wrote:
> >
> > > Great input Sarah, but you should believe what you are hearing, because
> > > since I've said it, there must be others thinking it also.
> > >
> > > Please tell us just why we should care! Hearing? Most Web sites are
> > > quite --why would *that* matter? Cognitive/motor? What problems
> > and how do
> > > we adjust? --is it practical? --would it *really* create a benefit? If a
> > > site is made to be easily usable for the widest possible
> > audience, does that
> > > mean making a site *less* than what it could be for the *broad*
> > majority of
> > > users? Should the broad majority have bland sites because of the
> > > difficulties of a few? What is the percentage of users who
> > require specially
> > > designed sites compared to those that do not?
> > >
> > > *Why* does such designing make smart business sense? What is
> > the percentage
> > > of people who *will or do* use the Web compared to the
> > percentage of people
> > > with disabilities? --because it is not the same figure.
> > >
> > > Hey, John... like the liveliness? :)
> > >
> > > Lauren
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free (at)yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

HWG: hwg-basics mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA