Why I created this resource
This list should not be taken as a stab against tools and tool vendors. I’ve said numerous times that we should do automatic testing first. When done properly, automatic testing offers a degree of efficiency that cannot be matched by other methods. However, that doesn’t mean that we should leave our compliance up to automated testing. As the tables above show, there are 9 WCAG Success Criterion (in Level A and AA) that cannot be tested for in any meaningful manner using a tool. There are another 13 that can be tested for automatically but require a human to verify. Full compliance and risk mitigation always requires the involvement of a skilled professional reviewer, even when you have a tool as well.
This article is based on the WCAG 2.0 (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines), a worth reading set of recommendations for making Web content more accessible, that is, more friendly for people with disabilities.
There has been much discussion, and some arguments, about how to determine the accessibility of websites. Unfortunately, this is often polarised around two simplistic choices: A compliance/conformance based approach that usually involves a checklist of criteria; or, some form of user testing by people who have different disabilities and/or who rely on different assistive technologies. Both approaches have their strength and limitations, and neither can provide a reliable declaration about the accessibility of a site on its own.
Worldspace FireEyes « Deque Systems | Software, Training, and Consulting for Web Accessibility and Section 508 Compliance
Worldspace FireEyes is an unprecedented, nextgen web accessibility tool that ensures both static and dynamic content within a web portfolio are compliant with standards such as Section 508, WCAG 1.0, and WCAG 2.0.
A guide to understanding and implementing Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0
W3C Working Group Note 14 October 2010
Web Accessibility for People with Intellectual / Cognitive Disabilities