Please describe how this compares with your work with the W3C & epubcheck

[mgifford]

The README should have something talking about the other big EPUB checker https://github.com/w3c/epubcheck

How does this compare? Also, since EPUB is basically HTML in a wrapper, folks like me might want to know if axe or HTML CS might be accessibility engines that could be used too.

[rdeltour]

Ace is an accessibility checker:

• it runs automated tests, which by nature (being fully automated) can only cover a limited subset of what needs to be evaluated for accessibility
• it extracts information (e.g. content outline, metadata, images alt text) to assist in a complete accessibility evaluation.

EPUBCheck is a conformance checker:

• it verifies that EPUB content is conforming to the EPUB specification
• it does not indicate anything regarding the accessibility of the EPUB publication

Finally, as stated in both the readme page and the website, Ace is based on Deque's Axe. The Axe engine is run on the EPUB HTML content when running Ace, with a rule set slightly customised for EPUB. Note that in addition, Ace also runs EPUB-specific checks which are not provided by Axe.

I'll add a mention of EPUBCheck on the readme and the website, thanks for the suggestion! 👍

[sjabsr]

Hello ! I found this discussion while verifying whether I was doing redundant work by running EpubCheck AND Daisy ACE (we obviously want our epubs to be both accessible AND well formed).

From you answer above I understand that the epub checks section of ACE's test doesn't run EpubCheck. But I didn't see the mention you've proposed to put in the readme file?

Thanks for the information anyway !