[WG: Accessibility] Which QA server best reflects 2.9? Were accessibility issues filed and addressed?

[Keli Sato Amann]

Hi Folks,
I haven't been following this group closely so apologies if this has been discussed. My colleagues Jackie, Christine, and I were looking at QA servers to get a sense of what was coming up for 2.9 so we could prepare for migration. We happened to log into different servers and we noticed that http://sakaicle1-trunk.uits.indiana.edu:8181/portal has all the bells and whistles (for instance, more drag and drop for managing tabs, "add a tool" option directly under navigation) but QA3-US did not. I have three questions:

1) Which server more accurately reflects what's going to be in 2.9, assuming everything passes? We noted that sakaicle1-trunk is described as "Setup for Sakai Accessibility Review and 2.9 QA Work" so is that the best server to look at?

2) Were the critical issues that are documented in the 41 pages on https://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/2ACC/Sakai+2.9+Accessibility+Review+Results ever addressed? I don't see JIRA numbers listed next to all of those issues and there is only one JIRA listed on this page as "to push for 2.9." If those JIRAs were created, is there an easy way to see if they were all addressed?

3) How have critical accessibility issues been dealt with historically for Sakai? Are they blockers for release? Or is this the first comprehensive review that's been done? I suppose each school ultimately is responsible for complying with federal law, but none of us are experts and look to this group for guidance.

Thanks for your feedback
Keli Amann
User Experience Specialist
Academic Computing Services, Stanford University