© Heretic Press and Tim Anderson 2007. Page created 11th April 2007. Last updated 7th March 2008. Related pages comparing .gov sites Survey Australian .gov.au UK .gov.uk and USA .gov websites. Survey Results The Editor's email. Copyright and access conditions.
| W3C | A | Victoria | W3C | A | NSW | W3C | A | QLD | W3C | A | WA SA NT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PASS | 20 | Melbourne | PASS | 15 | UTS | PASS | 26 | Griffith | PASS | 16 | Adelaide |
| 23 | 22 | Monash | 3 | 13 | Charles Sturt | PASS | 19 | QUT | PASS | 11 | W. Aust. |
| PASS | 16 | Deakin | 4 | 15 | Macquarie | PASS | 21 | Queensland | FAIL | 13 | Charles Darwin |
| PASS | 14 | La Trobe | 6 | 16 | W. Sydney | PASS | 16 | S. QLD | PASS | 15 | Curtin |
| PASS | 13 | Tasmania | PASS | 11 | Newcastle | PASS | 14 | James Cook | 6 | 15 | Edith Cowan |
| PASS | 15 | Swinburne | 1 | 10 | Sydney | 17 | 16 | Canberra | 3 | 6 | Murdoch |
| 18 | 7 | RMIT | 13 | 5 | Wollongong | 11 | 11 | Central QLD | 16 | 19 | Uni SA |
| 16 | 4 | Ballarat | 24 | 6 | S. Cross | 9 | 9 | Bond | 3 | 9 | Notre Dame |
| 36 | 8 | VUT | 63 | 15 | UNSW | 24 | 7 | ANU | 15 | 9 | Flinders |
| 96 | 11 | Catholic |
It is not a personal reflection on any individual staff that their University may have purchased faulty CMS software, or failed to configure it correctly, but I believe it is their job to make management aware of the potential legal liability and I hope this page will assist them in demonstrating why their webpages have invalid, inaccessible code and to bring the potential legal liability to the administration's attention. Conversely, many University staff who have to manage up to 750,000 webpages should be congratulated for their knowledge, concern and expertise in making their University webpage accessible and for being able to deal with and configure some intolerant Content Management Systems (CMS) to make accessible webpages.
University of Canberra Homepage.
http://www.canberra.edu.au/
W3C test University of Canberra
Verified File Name: University of Canberra
Result: FAIL validation, 16 ERRORS
Date 29th May 2007
Cynthia Says® - Web Accessibility Report
Verified File Name: University of Canberra
Date: 29 May 2007 PASSED Accessibility Verification S.508 and Priority 1 2 and 3.
Validation Error Score http://www.canberra.edu.au/ 16 ERRORS
Page accessibility features http://www.canberra.edu.au/ 17
The Canberra University homepage failed to validate because from line 34, it has html tags in the Javascript which are embedded in the page, scripts could be linked to. The scripts also use target="_blank" which opens new windows which is never a good idea for accessibility, there is no warning that new windows will be opened.
The linked stylesheet fails to validate because of two minor errors. Unknown pseudo-element or pseudo-class :current on lines 91 and 150.
It is a table layout which does not use headings or paragraphs to structure the relative importance of content. It uses onmouseover and onclick but the document is missing an onfocus tag, so that non-mouse users will get the same information. Users without Javascript also need an alternative to Javascript links in a noscript element.
The homepage has a document encoding of iso-8859-1, but a translated page has the larger character set of utf-8. Canberra University has a page translated into Chinese which seems better than the English homepage from an accessibility point of view, it has accesskeys and a tabindex, unfortunately it also has a lot of old style font formatting tags like leftmargin align etc.
If Canberra University could combine some features of the English homepage and the Chinese page, they could have an even better site, that would be easier to maintain, the accessibility of the Chinese page is extraordinary in some respects, the only Australian page tested with has both accesskeys and a tabindex. Is it the only option to have the whole University of Canberra site translated into duplicate Chinese versions of the English pages? Couldn't the site all be translated by Google from the English pages, so you do not have to continually update two completely different language versions of each page. Centrelink do this with 59 different languages, translations in all major languages, but not a single Centrelink staff member can write html code, astounding! A well coded site can now be translated into Chinese as well as major
European languages.
Google is working on beta versions of English translation into Chinese, simplified and traditional script. The Canberra University homepage translated into Chinese demonstrates why images are no good at conveying text information, missing graphics make the translated page less than perfect, I cannot assess the accuracy of the Google translation. Wouldn't it be cheaper and less trouble to remove text from the page graphics and rely on a translation service like Google, you could put a "Translate into Chinese" link (or many other languages) on the homepage and discontinue updates of the other Canberra made Chinese pages altogether!
In a light grey on a white background at the page footer, this page states that "This page complies with W3C standards". It does not validate, but it does pass Priority Three accessibility testing, but it could still be better.
The CMS system used is Squiz MySource v3.8.6. To pass higher level of accessibility tests, all it needed was to remove a single styling tag from the html img which was used with the deprecated attribute: border which has now been done.
This page has changed recently on or about the end of May 2007 (tested 29th May), so that it now passes Priority Three accessibility Checkpoints, well done Canberra, one of only five sites to pass level Three. Does Squiz MySource v3.8.6. allow the addition of more meta tags?
Creation and modification dates, keywords and links to other pages could be added.
Australian Catholic University Homepage.
http://www.acu.edu.au/
W3C test Australian Catholic University
Verified File Name: Australian Catholic University
Result: FAIL validation, 45 ERRORS Date 1st May 2007
Result: FAIL validation, 96 ERRORS Date 6th September 2007
Result: PASSED validation, NO ERRORS Date 7th March 2008
Cynthia Says® - Web Accessibility Report
Verified File Name: Australian Catholic University
Date: 1st May 2007
FAILED Accessibility Verification S.508 and Priority 1.
Validation Error Score http://www.acu.edu.au/ 45 ERRORS
Page accessibility features http://www.acu.edu.au/ 11
The page when first tested failed W3C validation because it did not correctly define the css tag. Missing alt tags were beginning to become unusual! It uses duplicated IDs id="white", or id="links". ID must be a unique name or value, this should be expressed as a class class="white" to call it many times from the stylesheet.
The Catholic University homepage used uppercase tags <BR>, </A> and <STRONG> which was valid in html 4 documents, but UPPERCASE is not valid in xhtml 1.0 Transitional documents.
The linked stylesheet failed to validate because of two minor errors. Value Error : font-weight 800% is not a font-weight value : 800% on lines 405 and 410.
The document failed Priority One accessibility testing only because of the missing alt tags, it failed higher level tests on Checkpoint 12.4 Associate labels explicitly with their controls and Checkpoint 4.3 failure to specify a language. It also fails 10.5 having links next to each other.
Links could be underlined and the inline styles put into the external stylesheet.
I did not set out just to find fault or say that my site was perfect, my site always needs to improve and welcomes constructive critical comment. It is not optimised for any one particular browser, but made for universal access with international W3C standards. I set out to test for objective W3C standards compliance. The Catholic University objected to my methodology and tested accessibility using a test browser Lynx. The Catholic University on or about March 7th 2008 updated their code to comply with W3C standards. I did not re-test their site for accessibility or compliance with at least WCAG Priority 1 accessibility guidelines aiming for Priority Three compliance.
There can be search engine penalities in the form of key word ranking penalties for invalid page code that webbots and search engine spiders cannot crawl, index and archive. There are also potential legal consequences for not providing an accessible website under Australian 1992 Disability Discrimination Laws.
Charles Darwin University Homepage.
http://www.cdu.edu.au/
W3C test Charles Darwin University
Verified File Name: Charles Darwin University
Result: FAIL validation, 11 ERRORS Date 30th April 2007
Result: PASS validation, No ERRORS Date 2nd May 2007
Result: FAIL validation, 7 ERRORS Date 10th May 2007
Result: FAILED validation, 6 ERRORS Date 31st August 2007
Cynthia Says® - Web Accessibility Report
Verified File Name: Charles Darwin University Date 2nd May 2007
PASSED Accessibility Verification S.508 and Priority 1 29th May 2007
Validation Error Score http://www.cdu.edu.au/ 6 ERRORS
Page accessibility features http://www.cdu.edu.au/ 13
Review updated 22nd June 2006. This pages changes frequently, it sometimes validates, it failed to validated a few days ago when it was ruined by a shockwave flash file which rotated between four pictures with a lot of text information in the pictures. Text in flash pictures is unreadable by a screen reader, no alternative was given to the flash to find out about the public lecture series. This could be a good use for the longdesc if the code could be added for each frame of the flash file, a text only longdesc. The flash file had been incorrectly embedded in the page, the noembed element was missing to give any alternative to the flash file.
Now on 22nd June it does not declare the Javascript correctly.
A translation of the Charles Darwin homepage into German shows why pictures are not a good way to convey text information. The whole page header graphic is lost. The flash pictures and alt picture tags are retained in English.
At the end of April 2007, when I first reviewed the Charles Darwin homepage, it failed W3C validation and all levels of accessibility testing.
I did not expect the object of study and subjects in the experiment to act so quickly or do so much in one month. Perhaps they were already planning changes as other pages on this site have a large text option missing from the homepage. Charles Darwin have staff who are concerned about accessibility and can reconfigure their CMS quickly to produce valid accessible documents.
How long will it take to correct recently added embed error and provide an alternatibe noembed.
The Charles Darwin University homepage went from passing to failing all Priority Checklists in one week. Before the no embed tag was used, they were one of only four Australian Universities who passed Priority Three accessibility testing.
There are still many more improvements they could make.
The homepage uses an external stylesheet but also has some unnecessary inline styles like
<span style="font-size:small;font-weight:bold;font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;color:#9c4302"> All this could be in the external stylesheet.
Links could be underlined. The layout uses tables, there are lots of level One Headings <h1> tags, but no lower level headings <h2> <h3>...<h6>.
University Adelaide Homepage.
http://www.adelaide.edu.au/
W3C test University of Adelaide
Verified File Name: University of Adelaide
Result: PASS validation, NO ERRORS Date 19th April 2007
Cynthia Says® - Web Accessibility Report
Verified File Name: University of Adelaide
Date: 19th April 2007
PASSED Accessibility Verification S.508. Priority 1.
Validation Error Score http://www.adelaide.edu.au/ NO ERRORS
Page accessibility features http://www.adelaide.edu.au/ 16
The Adelaide University homepage page passes Priority 1 accessibility testing but fails higher level testing Checkpoint 11.2, it uses div with the deprecated attribute: align and Checkpoint 13.1 the same link text refers to different resources. It also fails Point 12.4 Associate labels explicitly with their controls.
It is a bit of a messy table layout. There is one level One Heading <h1> tag, but no lower level headings <h2> <h3>...<h6> Headings can structure the relative importance of page content for example; <h1>Study at Adelaide</h1> Lower level headings could relate to schools or <h2>Research at Adelaide</h2> and <h3>Work at Adelaide</h3>. All links are underlined which is good to see for a change.
Having the web.services email in the header is likely to attract lots of spam emails. It could be hidden a bit from spam bots like the Swinburne example.
An interesting alt tag alt="Member of Group of Eight - Australia's Leading Universities"
This comment on international dates does not specifically refer to the University of Adelaide, it is a general comment about the Dublin Core Meta Tag schemata and dates used in Australian webpages.
The Australian Government AGLS state that dates must be in the format specified by the W3C, but this document dates from 1997.
A readable date such as May 7, 2007 can be read by humans and screen readers such as JAWS™ You could not use the American date formatting for the abbr element but only international dates.
W3C recommend using ISO8601 dating. An author might specify a date in the (ambiguous) format "10-9-07"; does this mean 9 October 2007 or 10 September 2007? The Dublin Core DC. standard used by Australian Universities does not resolve the ambiguous dates which can be read as a numerical string by Jaws™.
W3C recommendations META http-equiv="Expires" content="Tue, 20 Aug 1996 14:25:27 GMT" Internationalisation of dates and meta tags is recommended in Internationalization Best Practices.
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 10:46:04 GMT
The Australian Government standards for metadata. AGIMO state that date is Mandatory, but AGIMO use American format dates in all their meta tags. AGIMO seem to be out of touch with reality, for example some of the AGIMO award winning sites.
USA dates 2006-06-28 should be changed to international dating eg. <meta name="Date.Modified" content="Thu, 19 Apr 2007" />
University of South Australia Homepage.
http://www.unisa.edu.au/
W3C test University of South Australia
Verified File Name: University of South Australia
Result: FAIL validation, 16 ERRORS Date 18th April 2007
Result: FAIL validation, 14 ERRORS Date 19th September 2007
Cynthia Says® - Web Accessibility Report
Verified File Name: University of South Australia
Date: 18th April 2007
PASSED Accessibility Verification S.508. Priority 1, 2 and 3.
Validation Error Score when first tested http://www.unisa.edu.au/ 16 ERRORS
Page accessibility features http://www.unisa.edu.au/ 19
You can see why they pass Priority Three accessibility testing, their accessibility statement states they will comply with World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 at the Priority level 1, but they achieve more to Priority 3.
Generally a good tableless layout, but why use the windows character set windows-1252? Windows software or CMS systems should still use iso standards for text encoding? The University of Southern Queensland was the only other university to use a windows character set, maybe they use the same CMS. South Australia got the software to write Priority 3 accessible pages, but not validated pages while the University of Southern Queensland probably using the same CMS, got it to write validated pages but only accessible to Priority One.
One specific problem with the win 1252 character set may be more relevant to European Universities a possible error producing the € sign. There are other risky characters which might produce blanks with with a windows-1252 characters set.
A visually pleasing feature of the website for the University of SA are 360° panoramas of the campus, but it seemed to have problems providing an alternative like a few gif files in case a browser is missing javascript or the quicktime plugin. Javscript is used to load the movies, the <noscript> element is included, but it loads the same movie as the <script> element, it should provide an alternative a jpg, gif or even text descriptions of buildings.
On the virtual tour movie page <embed src="brookman_320.mov"> also needs to be matched by <noembed> and provide an alternative to the movie.
Flinders University Homepage.
http://www.flinders.edu.au/
W3C test Flinders University
Verified File Name: Flinders University
Result: FAIL validation, 15 ERRORS Date 1st May 2007
Cynthia Says® - Web Accessibility Report
Verified File Name: Flinders University
Date: 1st May 2007
PASSED Accessibility Verification priority 1 and S.508.
Validation Error Score http://www.flinders.edu.au/ 15 ERRORS
Page accessibility features http://www.flinders.edu.au/ 9
The Flinders University homepage is one of the only ones which uses Stylesheet layout information in the header, almost all others use a linked stylesheet which can be called by other pages.
The Flinder's University homepage has one major validation error which might affect the page translations into different languages? it defines two different encoding character utf-8 and iso-8859-1. Combined with the lack of a language, how will it look in other languages to a text reader? You can help it by defining the language tag for translations for Google, but Google is expert help, some text readers are simple text orientated number crunchers.
German,
Spanish,
French,
Italian or
Portuguese
The document also needs to have the javascript container rewritten as:
<script type="text/javascript"> </script>.
Not again! Ampersand Error, Present Sir.
The document passes Priority One accessibility testing, but it fails higher Priority Level two and three Checkpoints because; it fails Checkpoint 11.2 using the element: body with the deprecated attribute: bgcolor. It also fails Checkpoint 4.3 by having no language defined, it does not use the lang attribute.
It also fails on Checkpoint 10.5 and has adjacent links with nothing separating them on line 526. All the css styling is in the document header, so is the Javascript!, it might add too many Kb to a page with complex style sheets and prevents the use of multiple stylesheets, like
Griffith university. External CSS provides more flexibility. All other universities link to an external CSS stylesheet.
University of Tasmania Homepage.
http://www.utas.edu.au/
W3C test University of Tasmania
Verified File Name: University of Tasmania
Result: PASS validation, NO ERRORS Date 18th April 2007
Cynthia Says® - Web Accessibility Report
Verified File Name: University of Tasmania
Date: 17th April 2007
PASSED Accessibility Verification priority 1 and S.508.
Validation Error Score http://www.utas.edu.au/ NO ERRORS
Page accessibility features http://www.utas.edu.au/ 13
