Comments on: More News on the Target Accessibility Lawsuit

By: Stop Dreaming Start Action

Stop Dreaming Start Action — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 11:19:58 +0000

Website should be used for mutual exchange of human life that science is better..

By: Max

Max — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 11:45:20 +0000

Any legislation will cause resentment and stifle the use of new technology.

By: Joe Dolson

Joe Dolson — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 19:29:44 +0000

As developers and designers, we have absolutely no control of which devices will be used to render our pages and our content.

Absolutely true, Matt. We have some control over how successful the experience of the user might be with whatever device they choose, but we can't in any way dictate to them what that device will be.

By: Matt

Matt — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 19:25:19 +0000

I agree with those that have commented before me that the Web is not inately a visual medium. As developers and designers, we have absolutely no control of which devices will be used to render our pages and our content. We already have to deal with browser variations and versions, screen resolutions, etc. But we should also expect that some users will rely on screen readers, talking web capabilities, and hand-held devices to experience web content. Considering the Web as only a visual medium in many ways limits the kinds of user experiences it can accommodate.

By: David Zemens

David Zemens — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 17:52:53 +0000

@Mike

Yes, the government foots the bill. And yes it is not on the publisher’s, author’s, or agent’s shoulders, but you’re not going to suck me into that trap.

Would I try to do that to a friend of mine?

By: Stevie D

Stevie D — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 11:57:14 +0000

Chad:

Don’ forget that the primary reason the web has been so successful is the low barrier to entry. You don’t need to write accessible, validating XHTML to have a web presence.

That’s why one of our key aims should be to promote accessibility to authoring software developers. People using FrontPage or DreamWeaver should, unless they try hard to subvert the software, produce by default a page that is reasonably accessible. No, it won’t be up to our standards, but it will be adequate and will avoid putting up too many barriers. Unfortunately, that isn’t the case - the software that is aimed at people who don’t know better is doing nothing to help them, but is aiding and abetting them in churning out offensively inaccessible rubbish.

Is google maps supposed to be accessible to screen readers? What about information graphics?

Why shouldn’t it be? If I ask Google Maps for a route from one place to another, it presents it in both graphical and textual form - a map and a set of directions - and the latter is (or should be) perfectly accessible to non-visual agents.

Information graphics should be additionally rendered as text or tables if they are important to the content. Otherwise, people who can’t see your graphics - for whatever reason - won’t be able to understand the page!

Yes, there will be some pages on the web that are purely graphical, and where the content will not make sense without the visual aspect, but these are a very small minority.

By: Mike Cherim

Mike Cherim — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 11:50:55 +0000

@David: Yes, the government foots the bill. And yes it is not on the publisher’s, author’s, or agent’s shoulders, but you’re not going to suck me into that trap. I still feel the government should step in when it comes to the accessibility of private business web sites that serve the public if the party responsible for said site doesn’t take action on their own. But I don’t feel the government should pay for it. I wouldn’t, however, mind at all if they furnished educational resources and materials, or even if they offered grants or tax credits. I’m not saying government should be the bully.

By: David Zemens

David Zemens — Mon, 08 Oct 2007 20:41:10 +0000

@Mike
I remember and used the web when it was a text based interface — - I understand that it is has evolved to the graphic interface many of us use today.

Regarding books and Braille. Every publication that is registered for copyright through the Registrar of Copyrights in Library of Congress is subject to be produced in Braille and audio formats. The copyright applicant checks off a box or two stating this is permissible. The government takes it from there. That’s why Braille copies of Playboy magazine exist.

Are you saying that the government pays to convert the books to Braille and audio? Isn’t that somehow different than forcing the book writer to bear the costs?

By: Joe Dolson

Joe Dolson — Mon, 08 Oct 2007 18:32:19 +0000

Is google maps supposed to be accessible to screen readers? What about information graphics?

It would be great if the information conveyed by Google Maps were accessible to screen readers. Yes, there do exist purely visual media formats. But the format is NOT the information itself. Information graphics? The information in the graphic should also be conveyed in text. A graphic (say, a bar chart) is simply a graphical representation of data. There’s no reason that the same information can’t be represented accessibly.

I absolutely agree that the success of the web used to be the low barrier to entry. I’m not convinced that this is still the case. The crowding of the web has made the web a very changed environment. I think that the barriers are already higher than before, and that this is not an unreasonable expectation.

A lot of people use the web to do primarily visual things and I don’t think there is anything wrong with that.

Of course not. I don’t think that ANY accessibility-focused designer would say that the visual aspect of the web is “wrong.” It is the primary medium for the web — - it’s just not the ONLY medium for web information.

@Stevie, Chad, and Mike: Thanks for your comments! I appreciate the conversation.

By: Mike Cherim

Mike Cherim — Mon, 08 Oct 2007 17:02:24 +0000

@David: The web as we know it and use it is accessed by way of the support of a graphical user interface as accommodated by our operating system. The original internet was around before this type of interface was even invented. It’s all about sharing information. The guy who thunk all this up told us from the start that this was to be an accessible medium with universal access to all.

Regarding books and Braille. Every publication that is registered for copyright through the Registrar of Copyrights in Library of Congress is subject to be produced in Braille and audio formats. The copyright applicant checks off a box or two stating this is permissible. The government takes it from there. That’s why Braille copies of Playboy magazine exist.