WebXACT vs. Cynthia Says

Ye' old general discussion board. Basically, for everything that isn't covered elsewhere. Come here to shoot the breeze, shoot your mouth off, or whatever suits your fancy.
This forum is not for asking programming related questions.

Moderator: General Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Luke
The Ninja Space Mod
Posts: 6424
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 1:53 pm
Location: Paradise, CA

WebXACT vs. Cynthia Says

Post by Luke »

Aren't these two supposed to check the same things?

http://webxact.watchfire.com/

http://www.contentquality.com

If i check my pages on watchfire, they fail (in accessibility) but they do not fail the contentquality site. Anybody know why?
Roja
Tutorials Group
Posts: 2692
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 10:30 pm

Re: WebXACT vs. Cynthia Says

Post by Roja »

The Ninja Space Goat wrote:Aren't these two supposed to check the same things?
No. Webxact is sort of a mish-mash of a variety of checks, ranging from performance, to "quality" (extremely subjective), to functionality, and somewhere in there, supposedly accessibility.

Content quality, on the other hand, focuses specifically on a very strict interpretation of two, and only two accessibility standards.
The Ninja Space Goat wrote:If i check my pages on watchfire, they fail (in accessibility) but they do not fail the contentquality site. Anybody know why?
I went to the doctor, and told him I was sick. He didn't make me feel better. Anybody know why?

(Give more details, and symptoms, or we - like the doctor - cannot give a specific diagnosis).

Whats the url, so we can look at the errors given by each?
User avatar
Maugrim_The_Reaper
DevNet Master
Posts: 2704
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 5:43 am
Location: Ireland

Post by Maugrim_The_Reaper »

Both reported errors on one of my sites - oddly they both were level 3 WCAG errors - but the types were different between the two checks. Looks like they do not both test accessibility consistently in the same way. Both errors were valid - so each missed a few things by the way.
Post Reply