yes I
agree with you completely Duncan - I realise it isn't just blindness - I was
just using that as an example
to be
honest, I have never come across anything to do with dyslexia and colour schemes
in any of the work i have been involved in, so I can't comment on this -
although I find it hard to conceive that corporations with corporate colour
schemes would give this great consideration!? (although maybe completely wrong
here)
your
point about if something happened to one of my players at some
point still fits for the point I am raising - which is the fact
that perhaps it should still be up to the person delivering the
content. If one of my players became blind or deaf, or one of my players
told me that a family member couldn't use the site etc then accessibility would
certainly be more important to me and, given that it is my site, I would make
the decision to do something about it but I don't think it should be forced on
me by law nor do I think it should be for every web site on the Internet.
Obviously one can not determine one's viewing audience completely, that
is one of the beauties of the Internet and I still agree for services that would
be used by the less abled, accessibility should be important. I am making the
point that I don't think necessarily appropriate to force it upon every web
developer/site by law because I don't think that is appropriate.
Some
websites, including parts related to large organisations, are purely for
information purposes - just as adverts/information on billboards and posters in
streets, trains, buses etc - yet there is no legislation to say all of these
posters must also speak out loud or have braille etc
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 16 April 2004 15:05
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] Website accessibility in the UK
it's not just blindness though - it ranges from those with mobility problems (difficulty using mouse and keyboards), sight problems (don't use small fonts etc), deaf (Sign Language is their first language), dyslexic (need to have colour schemes that are readable), mental health problems, etc etc. by making it accessible, you hopefully allow just about everyone to use it. by not making it accessible, you could potentially exclude a large amount of people.
none of your club members might have mobility problems or be blind, but how many are dyslexic? who's to say you might not end up with some deaf players in the future? your league's referees have no doubt been accused of being blind... ;-)
"Lovelock, Richard J" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 16/04/2004 13:41
Please respond to dev
To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] Website accessibility in the UK
both sides of the argument have strong weight I think and I am personally
undecided as I have read through the emails coming...
BUT even though I support a government site, which puts accessibility as a
fairly high priority and rightly so for a site of that nature, I do agree
with Taz's argument that perhaps the decision should ultimately stay with
whoever is creating the website or service
Sites such as banks, large E-commerce, government should perhaps make
efforts to ensure accessibility because there is a good chance that people
who need it will be using the services
however, i have a site I run for my football club, there is an external link
from the league website but it doesn't get many hits from outside of our
club members, all of which I know have no disabilities such as blindness -
so, why should I build in accessibility to a site such as that? i don't
think it is fair to have the risk of being sued for not doing so either (not
that it is likely but the principle remains
nice light hearted debate for a Friday afternoon :o/ ;o)
-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Westbrook (FDM) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 16 April 2004 13:30
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ cf-dev ] Website accessibility in the UK
> I do agree it may be difficult to prosecute larger companies tho...
only from the perspective of the cost of litigation. It's actually _easier_
to prosecute large companies, I would imagine, because they can't argue
mitigating factors (ie cost) as an issue. 'So, Mr Nat West, you're owned by
Royal Bank of Scotland, which made �6.5billion in pre-tax profits last year.
Why isn't your web site accessible?'...
Ian W
----- Original Message -----
From: "Damian Watson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 1:23 PM
Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] Website accessibility in the UK
> I don't think that's true though Neil- you can't argue that there's a
> major degradation of experience on anything other than a Flash site and
> why you need a site to be in Flash is in most cases questionable.
>
> If you manage/ own a public space then you have to follow certain
> procedures- if everyone could get away with it then there would be very
> little disabled access etc -- then you would have a two tier exclusive
> situation. The same is true of websites, they are a public space in a
> similar sense.
>
> I do agree it may be difficult to prosecute larger companies tho...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 16 April 2004 13:14
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] Website accessibility in the UK
>
> I would be very very surprised if someone could successfully proceed
> with a
> case and win against a site which does not include or adhere to
> accessibility "guidelines" - agree with Taz, its entirely up to the
> freedom
> of speech and thought how you move forward with a site....
>
> There would be uproar if someone shut a site down as in some cases you
> could
> counter the whole scenario by saying that by making it accessible may
> lead
> to the whole experience being degraded which means able-bodied (or
> whatever
> term you want to use) are being discriminated against.....
>
> It's a no win situation whatever way you look at it.
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Taz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 16 April 2004 13:04
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [ cf-dev ] Website accessibility in the UK
>
> > well, the DRC _is_ the enforcenment body, and if you read the foreword
>
> > of the report Bert Massie, the (disabled) Chair, states quite clearly
> > that
> they
> > will be launching actions against companies, or supporting disabled
> > people who want to do so. They have the power to close web sites down
> > if, after advising about the issues, the site takes no notice/action.
>
> I'll apologise in advance for being politically incorrect, but I can't
> fathom why it should be illegal for a site not to be accessible to every
> user.
>
> Effectively it's more of a problem for the company involved, who may be
> losing a potential revenue stream, but essentially it's up to them who
> they
> target their advertising and services at.
>
> Okay, so you could call it discrimination, but then by the same token
> you
> could argue that book publishers are being discriminatory by not making
> all
> of their books available in Braille or audio. In fact, why aren't we
> getting
> sued for not translating sites into 60 different languages? Hey, that's
> xenophobia isn't it? Chinese sites for all! 2 billion people can't all
> be
> wrong.
>
> Don't get me wrong, I'm all for accessibility for all. And since nearly
> all
> of my work has to conform to RNIB guidelines (among others), I tend to
> build
> in accessibility from the start. But I get the feeling that all this
> political correctness is getting just a little out of hand.
>
> I agree that sites should be accessible to as many people as possible.
> But
> if the Government want to get the electronic UK on the map as the best
> in
> the world, why don't they offer incentives to businesses to implement
> these
> things, instead of the draconian attitude of biting off the hand that's
> paying taxes.
>
> Oh crap! I've gone all serious again.
>
> Nob Giblets!
>
> Taz
>
>
> --
> These lists are syncronised with the CFDeveloper forum at
> http://forum.cfdeveloper.co.uk/
> Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/
>
> CFDeveloper Sponsors and contributors:-
> *Hosting and support provided by CFMXhosting.co.uk* :: *ActivePDF
> provided
> by activepdf.com*
> *Forums provided by fusetalk.com* :: *ProWorkFlow provided by
> proworkflow.com*
> *Tutorials provided by helmguru.com* :: *Lists hosted by
> gradwell.com*
>
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Oriel House, 26 The Quadrant,
> Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DL, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business,
> Registered in England, Number 678540. It contains information which is
> confidential and may also be privileged. It is for the exclusive use of
> the
> intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient(s) please
> note
> that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or
> the
> information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you
> have
> received this communication in error please return it to the sender or
> call
> our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910. The opinions expressed within
> this
> communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions.
> Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com
>
> --
> These lists are syncronised with the CFDeveloper forum at
> http://forum.cfdeveloper.co.uk/
> Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/
>
> CFDeveloper Sponsors and contributors:-
> *Hosting and support provided by CFMXhosting.co.uk* :: *ActivePDF
> provided by activepdf.com*
> *Forums provided by fusetalk.com* :: *ProWorkFlow provided by
> proworkflow.com*
> *Tutorials provided by helmguru.com* :: *Lists hosted by
> gradwell.com*
>
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> --
> These lists are syncronised with the CFDeveloper forum at
http://forum.cfdeveloper.co.uk/
> Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/
>
> CFDeveloper Sponsors and contributors:-
> *Hosting and support provided by CFMXhosting.co.uk* :: *ActivePDF provided
by activepdf.com*
> *Forums provided by fusetalk.com* :: *ProWorkFlow provided by
proworkflow.com*
> *Tutorials provided by helmguru.com* :: *Lists hosted by
gradwell.com*
>
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
--
These lists are syncronised with the CFDeveloper forum at
http://forum.cfdeveloper.co.uk/
Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/
CFDeveloper Sponsors and contributors:-
*Hosting and support provided by CFMXhosting.co.uk* :: *ActivePDF provided
by activepdf.com*
*Forums provided by fusetalk.com* :: *ProWorkFlow provided by
proworkflow.com*
*Tutorials provided by helmguru.com* :: *Lists hosted by
gradwell.com*
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
=======================================================
This message contains information that may be privileged or
confidential and is the property of Capgemini UK plc.
It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you
are not the intended recipient, you are not authorised to read, print,
retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part
thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender
immediately and delete all copies of this message.
=======================================================
--
These lists are syncronised with the CFDeveloper forum at http://forum.cfdeveloper.co.uk/
Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/
CFDeveloper Sponsors and contributors:-
*Hosting and support provided by CFMXhosting.co.uk* :: *ActivePDF provided by activepdf.com*
*Forums provided by fusetalk.com* :: *ProWorkFlow provided by proworkflow.com*
*Tutorials provided by helmguru.com* :: *Lists hosted by gradwell.com*
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
