Does Wikimedia have a VPAT for 508 compliance?
Thanks,
Jill McGuire
USOPM/HRS/LTMS/HRMS/TOOLSTECH/QA - Macon, GA | 478.744.2374 |
jill.mcgu...@opm.govmailto:jill.mcgu...@opm.gov
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Answered off-list.
-Christine
-
Christine Moellenberndt
Community Associate
Wikimedia Foundation
christ...@wikimedia.org
On 2/16/11 9:16 AM, McGuire, Jill wrote:
Does Wikimedia have a VPAT for 508 compliance?
Thanks,
Jill McGuire
USOPM/HRS/LTMS/HRMS/TOOLSTECH/QA - Macon, GA |
Hoi,
What IS a VPAT for 508 in the first place ?
Thanks,
Gerard
On 16 February 2011 18:16, McGuire, Jill jill.mcgu...@opm.gov wrote:
Does Wikimedia have a VPAT for 508 compliance?
Thanks,
Jill McGuire
USOPM/HRS/LTMS/HRMS/TOOLSTECH/QA - Macon, GA | 478.744.2374 |
A Voluntary Product Accessibility
Templatehttp://www.itic.org/index.php?src=gendocsref=vpatcategory=resources,
or VPAT, is a standardized form developed by the Information Technology
Industry Council to show how a software product meets key regulations of
Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act.
On
Section 508, an amendment to the United States Workforce Rehabilitation Act
of 1973, is a federal law mandating that all electronic and information
technology developed, procured, maintained, or used by the federal
government be accessible to people with disabilities. Technology is deemed
to be
Hoi,
Given that Unites States government agencies do use MediaWiki, it is quite a
relevant question. Given that we provide such an important service on a
worldwide scale, I would be interested in learning the answer to the
question. Is that possible ?
In the final analysis we can only achieve our
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12355740
The Dalits (Untouchables) see English as utterly necessary to breaking
out of their current sociocultural trap, and never mind the local
languages.
That said, education is good. What can we do that might help people along?
- d.
Christine Moellenberndt wrote:
On 2/16/11 9:16 AM, McGuire, Jill wrote:
Does Wikimedia have a VPAT for 508 compliance?
Answered off-list.
What was the answer?
MZMcBride
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
On 16 February 2011 19:41, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Christine Moellenberndt wrote:
On 2/16/11 9:16 AM, McGuire, Jill wrote:
Does Wikimedia have a VPAT for 508 compliance?
Answered off-list.
What was the answer?
Or, as probably everyone is wondering by now: what makes this an
Hi!
If WMF want enwp.org I will gladly hand it over.
-Thomas
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Thomas Wang tl-lo...@hotmail.com wrote:
Hi!
If WMF want enwp.org I will gladly hand it over.
Thank you for running this service! I use it all the time for including
wikipedia links in Twitter.
It would be nice if it was officially supported by WMF or you
On 16 February 2011 20:58, aude aude.w...@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you for running this service! I use it all the time for including
wikipedia links in Twitter.
+1
It would be nice if it was officially supported by WMF or you were given
resources necessary to maintain the service.
+1
Original Message Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Do WMF
want enwp.org? Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 15:58:37 -0500 From: aude
aude.w...@gmail.com aude.w...@gmail.com Reply-To: Wikimedia
Foundation Mailing List
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.orgfoundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
I preffer wp.org (if is possible) to make internationalization easier. So to
en.wiki would be en.wp.org, de.wiki de.wp.org and etc.
_
*Béria Lima (Beh)
*
2011/2/16 Moka Pantages mpanta...@wikimedia.org
Original Message Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Do WMF
want
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 5:27 PM, Béria Lima berial...@gmail.com wrote:
I preffer wp.org (if is possible) to make internationalization easier. So to
en.wiki would be en.wp.org, de.wiki de.wp.org and etc.
That would be a good thing to have, yes. However, what already exists
and, what is owned by
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Christine Moellenberndt
cmoellenber...@wikimedia.org wrote:
The answer is, to the best of our knowledge, no. But we'd like to
improve that.
i took it off-list as it seemed to be a question that was more
Media-Wiki centered, and not as much Foundation centered.
Hoi,
Eh? When Wikipedia is to comply with this, technically it will be in
MediaWiki where such compliance is realised. Also MediaWiki is a Wikimedia
Foundation project in its own right.
Many people who read this list, including me, find this a subject that is
absolutely on topic. Even stronger, I
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Pedro Sanchez pdsanc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Christine Moellenberndt
cmoellenber...@wikimedia.org wrote:
The answer is, to the best of our knowledge, no. But we'd like to
improve that.
i took it off-list as it seemed to be a
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Pedro Sanchez pdsanc...@gmail.com wrote:
Hmm.. strikes me odd and worries me than Community Associate doesn't
seem to differentiate between software Media-Wiki (sic), and
Foundation/Community issues (Wikimedia).
Opening post was about if Wikimedia (as
While I sympathize that people think this issue should be discussed here, it
is a direct question to the Wikimedia Foundation from a government official,
and it needs to be responded to by the WMF. While the post wound up here
(and for that, I will look directly at the WMF for not having a really
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
While I sympathize that people think this issue should be discussed here, it
is a direct question to the Wikimedia Foundation from a government official,
and it needs to be responded to by the WMF. While the post wound up here
VPAT is a statement by the authors of software, showing how accessibility
needs are taken account of in the software. Buyers and users of the software
may wish to (or have a duty to) take that into account in their decision
whether they will use the software.
WMF might be asked for Mediawiki's
On Feb 16, 2011, at 5:52 PM, Nathan wrote:
At some point WMF employees might just stop posting here altogether,
to escape the unfounded criticism.
This +1. I can think of what, three or four instances in the past couple of
weeks, in which WMF employees were excessively criticized for their
Dan Rosenthal wrote:
On Feb 16, 2011, at 5:52 PM, Nathan wrote:
At some point WMF employees might just stop posting here altogether,
to escape the unfounded criticism.
This +1. I can think of what, three or four instances in the past couple of
weeks, in which WMF employees were excessively
On Feb 17, 2011, at 12:00 AM, MZMcBride wrote:
Dan Rosenthal wrote:
On Feb 16, 2011, at 5:52 PM, Nathan wrote:
At some point WMF employees might just stop posting here altogether,
to escape the unfounded criticism.
This +1. I can think of what, three or four instances in the past couple
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 12:00 AM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Dan Rosenthal wrote:
On Feb 16, 2011, at 5:52 PM, Nathan wrote:
At some point WMF employees might just stop posting here altogether,
to escape the unfounded criticism.
It's not about assuming that Wikimedia's
Le 17/02/2011 02:07, Dan Rosenthal a écrit :
I'm not referring to a single incident. I'm referring to a broader trend;
there have been recent incidents on other mailing lists as well, including
ones where staff subscriptions are more prevalent than foundation-l (although
I'm going to
On Feb 16, 2011, at 9:00 PM, MZMcBride wrote:
Most Wikimedia employees don't post or subscribe to this list already,
though I don't think it has very much to do with criticism. Wikimedia
employees are required to be subscribed to staff-l, but they're not required
to be subscribed to this list
Dan Rosenthal wrote:
I'm not referring to a single incident. I'm referring to a broader trend;
there have been recent incidents on other mailing lists as well, including
ones where staff subscriptions are more prevalent than foundation-l (although
I'm going to disagree with you and suggest
On Feb 17, 2011, at 1:29 AM, MZMcBride wrote:
Dan Rosenthal wrote:
I'm not referring to a single incident. I'm referring to a broader trend;
there have been recent incidents on other mailing lists as well, including
ones where staff subscriptions are more prevalent than foundation-l
On Feb 17, 2011, at 12:34 AM, Pronoein wrote:
Le 17/02/2011 02:07, Dan Rosenthal a écrit :
I'm not referring to a single incident. I'm referring to a broader trend;
there have been recent incidents on other mailing lists as well, including
ones where staff subscriptions are more prevalent
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 21:00, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Most Wikimedia employees don't post or subscribe to this list already,
You might be surprised at the number that do subscribe. Not that I've got
an official count (since people use their personal accounts, such as
myself),
Le 17/02/2011 03:41, Dan Rosenthal a écrit :
Your solution is that it is easier to blame the staff, rather than point out
that the criticism lacks any foundation? And then you say assume good
faith? That does not make much sense to me. Good faith is a two-way street.
Not at all. I'm saying
On Feb 17, 2011, at 1:49 AM, Pronoein wrote:
Le 17/02/2011 03:41, Dan Rosenthal a écrit :
Your solution is that it is easier to blame the staff, rather than point out
that the criticism lacks any foundation? And then you say assume good
faith? That does not make much sense to me. Good
I am loathe to dive in here, since it was my post that kind of
kick-started this whole thing and I certainly don't want to draw any
more fire to be honest. But I also feel loathe to stay away, partially
for that same reason, but also because of a few other things I've been
thinking about not
35 matches
Mail list logo
