Accessible Content Management Systems

I like the idea of using a con­tent man­age­ment sys­tem for on some projects. How­ever, if acces­si­bil­ity is a pri­or­ity then options are quickly go from many to far fewer. For­tu­nately, many of the larger open source con­tent man­age­ment sys­tems have taken on a goal of achiev­ing some level of acces­si­bil­ity, if only as a byprod­uct of being stan­dards compliant.

The ques­tion of whether a con­tent man­age­ment is acces­si­ble is a com­pli­cated one, regard­less of what mea­sure of acces­si­bil­ity some­one chooses to use. Every con­tent man­age­ment sys­tem has dif­fer­ent areas which may or not be acces­si­ble. Here are some of those factors:

  • CMS gen­er­ated con­tent When a user sub­mits con­tent to be included for dis­play in a CMS, inac­ces­si­ble tags/structure is some­times used to present that con­tent to the end user.
  • Tem­plate Sys­tem The tem­plate sys­tem con­trols how the con­tent is pre­sented. How much does the sys­tem allow the site admin­is­tra­tor to define his/her own struc­ture and tags? While all sys­tems facil­i­tate tem­plate cus­tomiza­tion to some degree, many will still require inac­ces­si­ble tags or struc­ture to be used.
  • Admin­is­tra­tive Fea­tures While the above points pri­mar­ily ref­er­ence what a site vis­i­tor would see, the tool used to input con­tent also needs to be acces­si­ble, whether is is the back­end of a web­site or a stand­alone application.
  • Third-party Plu­g­ins The con­tent man­age­ment sys­tems that I have worked with have all allowed peo­ple to develop mod­ules or plu­g­ins to pro­vide addi­tional func­tion­al­ity to the sys­tem. What kind of guide­lines are devel­op­ers required to adhere to when sub­mit­ting new modules?
  • Any­thing Else?

That’s a short list that’s too gen­eral to really be use­ful for any­thing, but may be a help­ful frame­work when look­ing at dif­fer­ent con­tent man­age­ment sys­tems. With all of the stan­dards based design evan­ge­lism out there right now most of the major sys­tems are at least dis­cussing devel­op­ment in a direc­tion that will lead to greater acces­si­bil­ity with some projects already claim­ing some form of stan­dards com­pli­ance. That said, I know at least a cou­ple of peo­ple who weren’t found exist­ing sys­tems lack­ing in the area of acces­si­bil­ity and opted to develop their own home­grown sys­tem to meet their needs.

I’m hop­ing to explore this issue in greater detail– do any of you have any expe­ri­ence with an acces­si­ble CMS? Here is a (very incom­plete) list of links I’ve recently found on the topic…

Sorry– com­ments were turned off ear­lier, they are on now– thanks.

  1. david Clark says:

    Inter­est­ing stuff…

    I think that CMS’s are much like any other author­ing tool, they are nei­ther inher­ently acces­si­ble or inac­ces­si­ble, its all in what one pro­duces with them.

    I think that rather than acces­si­bil­ity com­pli­ance per se, I would look at the lay­outs used. If they are tableless/xhtml com­pli­ant, its a pretty good indi­ca­tion that acces­si­bil­ity will be a non-issue.

    I have had good luck with Dru­pal and Word­Press (yes, I see blogs as just low-end CMS’s).

    The notion that Mambo cre­ated a sep­a­rate fork just to address acces­si­bil­ity make me cringe in hor­ror — there is no rea­son why that should be necessary.

  2. Good points David– for­tu­nately many blogs (and some CMS’s) now com­pletely sep­a­rate con­tent from pre­sen­ta­tion, how­ever in my (again lim­ited) expe­ri­ence with some sys­tems there in an inac­ces­si­ble pre­sen­ta­tion layer tied into the core of the sys­tem. It is those sys­tems that I am refer­ring to. For­tu­nately more and more sys­tems are mov­ing in the direc­tion of sep­a­rat­ing con­tent from pre­sen­ta­tion, but in the mean­time I’ll applaud efforts such as the Mambo fork with the hope that at least some of that code will be brought back into the main branch

  3. Great com­ments. I have been work­ing with Plone for a num­ber of years and was ini­tially attracted to it because at it’s base it is very acces­si­ble, as in 100%.

    The prob­lem with Plone (and any other sys­tem) is that it is very easy to break this by using WYSIWYG edi­tors (Like kupu which comes with Plone). As soon as you use a WYSIWYG edi­tor for your site you end up insert­ing a bunch of html which basi­cally destroys your acces­si­bil­ity and makes it very dif­fi­cult for less tech­ni­cal users also.

    Plone is a great prod­uct but it has a mighty steep learn­ing curve. The aver­age blog­ger can use it to cre­ate very acces­si­ble sites but they need to dis­able the WYSIWYG edi­tor and use Struc­tured Text or stan­dard Text so that the site remains accessible.

    My sites are designed so that they are acces­si­ble to con­tent con­trib­u­tors as well which also requires dis­abling (he he he) the WYSIWYG before it dis­ables the users.

    My own site is on hold while I develop some sites for an Inde­pen­dant Liv­ing Cen­ter here in Canada. Nice Blog!

Reply

or