FC: Web access justifies "draconian and invasive legislation"

[Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>]

> Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 22:13:38 +0000
> Subject: Re: FC: Responses to W3C/disabled groups Web regulations, hack
>         attacks
> From: "Saul Albert" <saul.albert () virgin net>
> To: declan () well com
>
> > [This is an interesting case of metaphor shear. Are web sites more like
> > books or movies (no disabled versions necessary) or bars and restaurants
> > where handicapped-accessible versions ARE required? --Declan]
>
>
> Dear Declan,
>
> WHAT?
>
> Er... ever heard of braille? what about scanner/readers and audio books.
>
> Many mainstream movies are available on audio release from the RNIB (in
> England at least), abridged versions of books for cognitively disabled
> people, subtitles, brailleFAX etc etc etc...
>
> In any case, the issue for web accessibility is in some cases even more
> important than cultural exclusion issues. The information networks made
> available by the Internet are vital for the dissemination of disability
> rights activists as well as global disability discrimination issues. The use
> of IT in general presents a fantastic opportunity for disabled users in the
> workplace. It also can supplement woefully inadequate physical access (most
> European cities are still deplorably inaccessible.)
>
> The Web Accessibility Initiative is doing its best to provide standards for
> access, but still 99% of web sites are inaccessible to visually and
> cognitively impaired people. Even more make it impossible for non-mouse
> users to access sites (for lack of keyboard shortcuts.) There is nowhere
> near enough investment from the software giants, and the best offering
> (sadly from Microsoft) is appalingly difficult to use. The saddest thing is
> that due to browser wars and the many idiotic and mal-communicative
> "features" provided as ammo for this conflict, there is no way of
> automatically regulating accessibility features.
>
> Web sites are not only  like bars and restaurants (AND books and movies),
> but are also like banks and employment resources and education and public
> resources. The web is as much a social space as a public library, and as in
> the "social model of disability" case of the man in the wheelchair, the
> library and the stairs, it is the stairs that are disabling the man, not the
> wheelchair. The idiotic ineptitude of 99% of web designers is disabling
> people. GOD, even most disability rights organisations web sites are only
> JUST accessible, and then are usually fairly crap in terms of info design
> and aesthetics.
>
> Web access needs to happen. If it takes draconian and invasive legislation
> to do it, so be it.


> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 21:44:38 -0500
> To: declan () well com
> From: "J.D. Abolins" <jda-ir () njcc com>
> Subject: Re: FC: Responses to W3C/disabled groups Web regulations, hack
>   attacks
>
> At 07:58 PM 2/14/00 -0500, Declan wrote:
> > [This is an interesting case of metaphor shear. Are web sites more like 
> > books or movies (no disabled versions necessary) or bars and restaurants 
> > where handicapped-accessible versions ARE required? --Declan]
>
> That's a great term, "Metaphor shear."
>
> Background note for the following comments: My wife is blind and I have 
> dealt with adaptive technology for blindness.
>
> To complicate matters a bit, there are adaptations for books and movies. 
> In US copyright forms for books, there has been a check off box to allow 
> the government to adapt the work for blind people. Common adaptations are 
> Braille, soundsheets (floppy record disks, akin to the "records" that some 
> magazines used to have once in a while decades ago), and four track/slow 
> speed cassettes. The Library of Congress provides many such "books." 
> Independent organizations such Recordings for the Blind & Dyslexic provide 
> books in alternate formats under a slightly different arrangement.
>
> Some movies are enhanced with descriptive sound tracks. Most often this is 
> done on videocassette.
>
> Having said this, it is important to note that these adaptations are NOT 
> under the ADA or other legal accessibility requirements. They are 
> voluntary adaptations.
>
> Such a distinction about accessibility and the awareness of the "metaphor 
> shear" are helpful. Otherwise, we can confuse "accessibility" for Web 
> pages with the legally required physical accessibility for places of 
> public accommodation and such.
>
> BTW, is a Web site a place of public accomodation? I think a poor analogy 
> here can lead to bad policy. Maybe there's an argument that a government 
> Web site is a place of public accomodation but should it be made to most 
> Web sites? I am leery of extending that broadly.
>
> J.D. Abolins
> Meyda Online
> http://www.meydabbs.com



> From: "mark stechbart" <mstechbart () email msn com>
> To: <declan () well com>
> Subject: Re: Responses to W3C/disabled groups Web regulations, hack attacks
> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 18:16:28 -0800
> Organization: Microsoft Corporation
> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211
>
> when will your postings and your pubs be handicapped accessible?  You will
> be eventually be in line.....



> Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 09:02:01 -0700
> From: "Ralph S. Hoefelmeyer" <ralph.hoefelmeyer () wcom com>
> Subject: RE: Responses to W3C/disabled groups Web regulations, hack attacks
> To: declan () well com
> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
> Importance: Normal
>
> some people are cripples, in one way or another.  life is not fair.  I, for
> one, am tired of spending my coin for the compassion of others.
>
> Let's just say I have "Severe Compassion Deficit", SCD.  Is that a
> disability under the ADA?  If so, where is my cut of stolen goods, er, I
> mean, tax proceeds.
>
> Ralph



> X-Sender:  (Unverified)
> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2
> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 20:33:52 -0500
> To: declan () well com
> From: "B.K. DeLong" <bkdelong () zotgroup com>
> Subject: Re: FC: Responses to W3C/disabled groups Web regulations, hack
>   attacks
>
> At 07:58 PM 02/14/2000 -0500, you wrote:
> > [This is an interesting case of metaphor shear. Are web sites more like 
> > books or movies (no disabled versions necessary) or bars and restaurants 
> > where handicapped-accessible versions ARE required? --Declan]
>
> Hey Declan,
>
> I think the major problem with Web accessibility is that people are 
> concentrating solely on the accessibility for the disabled. They fail to 
> realize that the Web Accessibility Guidelines are for international users, 
> people with slower connectivity, and people with older browsers. While the 
> accessibility for the disabled is quite an important issue, this narrow 
> focus of accessibility often allows for the general public to push it aside.
>
> Another under examined side of the situation is the standards compliance 
> of browsers. If Netscape and IE had FULL W3C support, accessibility would 
> be no problem whatsoever because accessibility is built-in to the 
> standards. Web developers could use HTML and CSS as-is without the fear of 
> browser problems.
> --
> B.K. DeLong
> Research Lead
> ZOT Group
>
> 617.642.7149
> bkdelong () zotgroup com
> http://www.zotgroup.com


> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 22:34:31 -0800 (PST)
> From: James Baldwin <atavist () teleport com>
> To: Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>
> Subject: Re: FC: Responses to W3C/disabled groups Web regulations, hack
>  attacks
>
> On Mon, 14 Feb 2000, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>
> > [This is an interesting case of metaphor shear. Are web sites more like
> > books or movies
>
> Are movies more like books or plays?



> From: gep2 () terabites com
> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 20:49:59 -0600
> Subject: FC: Responses to W3C/disabled groups Web regulations, hack attacks
> To: declan () well com
> X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17
>
> Personally, I think that private individuals (and even companies) ought to be
> able to put up their own Web sites in any form they like (hell, they 
> should be
> able to build their Web pages in Swahili, if they want to).
>
> I think that it is eminently reasonable that GOVERNMENT Web sites, paid for
> directly by taxpayers INCLUDING the handicapped, ought to be accessible to 
> the
> degree they reasonably can be made so.
>
> I would also encourage handicap-awareness organizations to put up a Web 
> site, or
> send E-mails perhaps, to Webmasters (and particularly to software authors
> offering HTML software tools) explaining what things facilitate 
> accessibility,
> so that they can favor/encourage those things in their offered tools.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLITECH -- the moderated mailing list of politics and technology
To subscribe: send a message to majordomo () vorlon mit edu with this text:
subscribe politech
More information is at http://www.well.com/~declan/politech/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------