ASP.NET MVC and Accessibility

[NickFitz]

Anybody got any knowledge about the general accessibility of web apps developed with ASP.NET MVC, particularly in terms of WCAG 2.0 Level AA compliance?

I'm assuming that it's somewhere between pretty poor and execrable if you just use the built-in controls MS provide with their default settings, but am willing to be persuaded otherwise

[voodooflux]

Anybody got any knowledge about the general accessibility of web apps developed with ASP.NET MVC, particularly in terms of WCAG 2.0 Level AA compliance?

I'm assuming that it's somewhere between pretty poor and execrable if you just use the built-in controls MS provide with their default settings, but am willing to be persuaded otherwise

I probably could have answered this for you tomorrow after attending the NxtGenUG event in Brum tonight - the presentation is on the ASP.NET MVC framework. Unfortunately I can't attend after all

[Jaws]

I'm about to embark on an ASP.NET MVC project myself. I was under the impression the idea was to write your own HTML perhaps using the HtmlHelper extension methods to render drop down lists bound to data for example. Those methods only render the simplest of items (radio buttons, hidden fields, checkboxes etc) - hard to see how they could mess up the accessibility on those.

[HairyArsedBloke]

In general, web controls don't work.

I use jQuery plugins & UI. I'm having a struggle, but that means nothing because I'm not a techie anymore.

[Weltchy]

Anybody got any knowledge about the general accessibility of web apps developed with ASP.NET MVC, particularly in terms of WCAG 2.0 Level AA compliance?

I'm assuming that it's somewhere between pretty poor and execrable if you just use the built-in controls MS provide with their default settings, but am willing to be persuaded otherwise

The default MS Controls are pretty poor for accessibility. However, you can change the way that the controls render. But its such an obscure way of doing it, I've found and forgotten it more times than I care to remember.

[DimPrawn]

The MS MVC framework does not use the WebForms controls, that's one of the key points in choosing this style of web dev over the "lets make web dev look like fat client win forms model".

Instead, you render the HTML in code and so have complete control over the markup.

Therefore the result is as accessable and std's compliant as you make it.

[NickFitz]

I'm about to embark on an ASP.NET MVC project myself. I was under the impression the idea was to write your own HTML perhaps using the HtmlHelper extension methods to render drop down lists bound to data for example. Those methods only render the simplest of items (radio buttons, hidden fields, checkboxes etc) - hard to see how they could mess up the accessibility on those.

The MS MVC framework does not use the WebForms controls, that's one of the key points in choosing this style of web dev over the "lets make web dev look like fat client win forms model".

Instead, you render the HTML in code and so have complete control over the markup.

Therefore the result is as accessable and std's compliant as you make it.

From what the ASP.NET bods down the office say, that sounds about right.

The DDA imposes even stricter legal obligations for accessibility on ClientOrg than are imposed on businesses, so somebody's been doing an assessment of the various technologies in use. As that somebody is on the Java team they weren't sure if the ASP.NET MVC stuff could meet those obligations, given the older .NET controls' poor track record in this area.

It looks like the MVC stuff makes it possible for the developers to do the Right Thing, so we won't have to take their copies of Visual Studio away after all

Thanks for your replies all

[HairyArsedBloke]

It looks like the MVC stuff makes it possible for the developers to do the Right Thing, so we won't have to take their copies of Visual Studio away after all

Ah, the truth finally comes out. The dark forces of anti-MS zealots are foiled again.

[NickFitz]

Ah, the truth finally comes out. The dark forces of anti-MS zealots are foiled again.

We didn't want to deprive them of their toys unless we had to. We feel they're more to be pitied than censured