March 1st, 2005

avatar

Why is 'Bobby' the standard?

Why is 'Bobby' (bobby.watchfire.com) the standard for accessibility checking? I know it's not the only tool out there. But if your pages don't pass Bobby, they're unacceptable to someone who cares about accessibility. It doesn't matter that the Bobby interface is incredibly lacking in usability - to the layman (who just wants to know if the page passes or fails), it's totally unusable.

Not to mention that there are a number of bugs in the checker, and the error messages can be so obtuse that you can't figure out what's causing them!