W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2002

RE: Legal requirements RE: statistics

From: Access Systems <accessys@smart.net>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 10:28:59 -0500 (EST)
To: RUST Randal <RRust@COVANSYS.com>
cc: "'Martin Sloan'" <martin.sloan@orange.net>, "'Kynn Bartlett'" <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>, "'Harry Woodrow'" <harrry@email.com>, "'Denise Wood'" <Denise_Wood@operamail.com>, "'w3c-wai-ig@w3.org'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, "'charles@w3.org'" <charles@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0201161026190.20926-100000@smarty.smart.net>
On Wed, 16 Jan 2002, RUST Randal wrote:

> this is a hypothetical situation, where the user agent, the user's
> disability and other issues have not been defined.  don't try to make it too
> specific, because the case would be different for each type of disability.

I intentionally left it non specific because you had indicated that was
what you were using.

   example (and I'm not saying it's legal or compliant)

a person using Lynx and a site with Javascript.


> 
> i'm getting some very odd arguments.  one person even suggested that the
> published standards are not correct.   

I am not sure one way or the other...I'm running pretty close to being in
over my head at this level.  I am more an experienced user than a coder

Bob

> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Access Systems [mailto:accessys@smart.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 10:14 AM
> To: RUST Randal
> Cc: 'Martin Sloan'; 'Kynn Bartlett'; 'Harry Woodrow'; 'Denise Wood';
> 'w3c-wai-ig@w3.org'; 'charles@w3.org'
> Subject: RE: Legal requirements RE: statistics
> 
> 
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2002, RUST Randal wrote:
> 
> > In the U.S. Section 508 is a mandate for Federal agencies.  However, the
> > ADA, which has requirements concerning "effective communication" applies
> to
> > all covered entities.  This is according to the U.S. Department of
> Justice.
> > The way I view it is that if a company has buildings that must be
> wheelchair
> > accessible, then their subsequent web site should be accessible to those
> > with disabilities.
> > 
> > Now, let's pretend for a moment that I am a lawyer, and that I have a
> client
> > who is being sued by a user who says that my client's web site is
> > inaccessible to them.  
> > 
> > For now, we will not specify a disability.  And my client is not a Federal
> > agency.
> > 
> > However, let's continue and theorize that the plaintiff's lawyer provides
> > the argument that their client cannot afford the money for new equipment,
> or
> > is unable to upgrade their browser.  He or she argues that, on those
> > grounds, my client should be providing content that is accessible in older
> > browsers.
> 
> now let's throw into the mix the fact that the compainant is physically
> unable to use (or use effectively) the newer browsers.
> 
> > How would I counter this?  I would say that, under the provisions of
> Section
> > 508 and the ADA, it would provide an "undue burden" on my client to create
> a
> > second version of their web site that is built on workarounds, and
> therfore
> 
> the backup to the lowest level (ASCII TEXT) will always be able to be
> viewed by ANY browser that I am aware of, so what is the point of not
> having that drop down level?   any site that has graphics that cannot be
> worked around in text has a problem ?! 
> 
> > is non-compliant with the rules.  I would also say that the plaintiff
> > chooses to continue to access the internet with hardware and software that
> > does not comply with standards, and that my client cannot be made
> 
> what is the standard, if the standard excludes certain groups of people
> then the standard could be declared illegal, it has happened in the past
> with other standards.
> 
> > responsible for the internet experience of this one person.  I would also
> 
> rarely is it one person, it is usually one person who gets fed up and sues
> but it is very rarely just "one person"
> 
> > say that, in the U.S., you can get current copies of IE or Netscape almost
> 
> but not everyone can use IE or Netscape of any version, where do you think
> the other browsers came from...from LYNX to Kconquerer and Mozilla
> 
> > anywhere.  You don't have to download them.  And I know for a fact that
> many
> > of the computer-industry magazines (Internet Works, Computer Arts, Create
> > Online), which are sold in Europe come with CDs that have current versions
> > of the browsers on them.  
> 
> and why would a visually impaired person for example buy a print
> magazine???
> 
> Bob
> 
>    ASCII Ribbon Campaign                        accessBob
> 
>     NO HTML/PDF/RTF in e-mail                   accessys@smartnospam.net
> 
>     NO MSWord docs in e-mail                    Access Systems, engineers
> 
>     NO attachments in e-mail,  *LINUX powered*   access is a civil right 
> *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#
> *#
> THIS message and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may be
> privileged.  They are intended ONLY for the individual or entity named
> above. If you are not the intended recipient, Please notify the sender as
> soon as possible. Please DO NOT READ, COPY, USE, or DISCLOSE this
> communication to others and DELETE it from your computer systems.  Thanks
> 

   ASCII Ribbon Campaign                        accessBob                       
    NO HTML/PDF/RTF in e-mail                   accessys@smartnospam.net       
    NO MSWord docs in e-mail                    Access Systems, engineers       
    NO attachments in e-mail,  *LINUX powered*   access is a civil right 
*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#
THIS message and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may be
privileged.  They are intended ONLY for the individual or entity named
above. If you are not the intended recipient, Please notify the sender as
soon as possible. Please DO NOT READ, COPY, USE, or DISCLOSE this
communication to others and DELETE it from your computer systems.  Thanks
Received on Wednesday, 16 January 2002 10:26:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:00 GMT