- From: Access Systems <accessys@smart.net>
- Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 22:13:31 -0500 (EST)
- To: Kelly Pierce <kpierce2000@earthlink.net>
- cc: Kurt_Mattes@bankone.com, david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com, John.Carpenter@pdms.com, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
On Tue, 1 Feb 2005, Kelly Pierce wrote: > > yes, the court ordered the transit system to design an accessible website. > it didn't order the transit system to give away free screen readers, as you > suggested. no but they had to make the site usable by text screen readers. Bob > > Kelly > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Access Systems" <accessys@smart.net> > To: "Kelly Pierce" <kpierce2000@earthlink.net> > Cc: <Kurt_Mattes@bankone.com>; <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>; > <John.Carpenter@pdms.com>; <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> > Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 9:04 PM > Subject: Re: accessible banking: > > > > On Tue, 1 Feb 2005, Kelly Pierce wrote: > > > >> I wonder how many jobs are calibrated so the end user runs "Linux > >> operating > >> system, Lynx browser, and emacspeak text to audio adaptive software"? I > >> suspect very few. > > > > besides myself I,ve only met one other person but I was using it more as > > an example of an open source solution to high priced proprietary > > software. > > > >> The ADA prohibition against charging for an accommodation does not > >> pertain > >> to personal devices, such as eyeglasses or wheelchairs. if the screen > >> reader is on a public terminal, then the entity with the terminal is > >> responsible for the cost. If the screen reader is on a user's own > >> machine, > >> then it would likely be considered a personal device and the end user is > >> responsible for the cost, just like a wheelchair user is responsible for > >> the > >> cost of the wheelchair in order to use a wheelchair accessible building. > > > > not so, Transit sytems have lost lawsuits on having inaccessible > > websites. and there is a requirement for the text alternative, we > > discuss ad nausiam on this groupp > > > > Bob > > > >> > >> Kelly > >> > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Access Systems" <accessys@smart.net> > >> To: <Kurt_Mattes@bankone.com> > >> Cc: <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>; > >> <kpierce2000@earthlink.net>; > >> <John.Carpenter@pdms.com>; <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> > >> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 10:50 AM > >> Subject: RE: accessible banking: > >> > >> > >> > On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 Kurt_Mattes@bankone.com wrote: > >> > > >> >> What I am thinking about is how the poverty issue impacts the security > >> >> issue. > >> >> I describe it as a poverty issue since the statement "The law should > >> >> read > >> >> that anyone should be able to access and fully use any tehnology > >> >> appropriate > >> >> for a task and which fits their needs." includes people without > >> >> disabilities > >> >> and I believe is an attempt to include less economically fortunate > >> >> members > >> >> of the communities addressed by the W3C WAI Guidelines. Poverty is > >> >> not > >> >> an > >> >> accessibility issue unique to these communities as it impacts many > >> >> outside > >> >> of these communities. > >> > > >> > but people with disabilities are more likely to be below the poverty > >> > level > >> > > >> >> The problem arises when an Internet user fortunate enough to have an > >> >> early > >> >> 1990's era system attempts to visit a secure site. This system is > >> >> probably > >> > > >> > or those persons not using the Windows operating system, such as Mac,s, > >> > Linux and a whole range of open source products > >> > > >> >> not capable of supporting current encryption standards. Does the > >> >> secure > >> >> site > >> >> owner have an obligation to provide this user access at the risk of > >> >> compromising security? > >> > > >> > however demanding that a user purchase an expensive piece of specific > >> > software is not a security issue. > >> > > >> >> Or does the "...appropriate for a task..." part of > >> >> this statement mean this era browser would be exempt from the site > >> >> owners > >> >> obligation? And if we make this exception, is it not also fair to say > >> >> users of "free" browsers capable of supporting current encryption > >> >> standards > >> >> and 'modeling' IE browser behavior have access to any site optimized > >> >> for > >> >> accessibility with an IE browser? > >> >> > >> >> Given that non-Internet Explorer browsers are now able to 'model' the > >> >> behavior > >> >> of an Internet Explorer browser, a distinction between the product > >> >> Internet Explorer and the behavior of this product needs to be made. > >> >> To > >> >> say > >> >> a site is only accessible with an IE browser can mean two different > >> >> things. > >> >> Either the product Internet Explorer or the behavior of an IE browser > >> >> is > >> >> needed. "Free" browsers able to 'model' Internet Explorer behavior > >> >> provide > >> >> the means for less economically fortunate users to access sites > >> >> optimized > >> >> for the Internet Explorer browser without incurring any expense or > >> >> exposure > >> >> to any of the Internet Explorer security issues often cited. > >> > > >> > however how does this allow people using specific adaptive software use > >> > the site, for example a cheap (poor) visually impaired user. accessing > >> > the site via Linux operating system, Lynx browser, and emacspeak text > >> > to > >> > audio adaptive software. > >> > > >> > 508 (as does title II and III of ADA) prohibits requiring individuals > >> > to > >> > purchase anything other users do not have to purchase.. if requiring > >> > IE, > >> > does that mean that the secure site must provide free a copy of JAWS > >> > ??? > >> > > >> > Bob > >> > > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Kurt Mattes > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> -----Original Message----- > >> >> From: david poehlman [mailto:david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com] > >> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 9:37 AM > >> >> To: Mattes, Kurt (Bank One); kpierce2000@earthlink.net; > >> >> John.Carpenter@pdms.com; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > >> >> Subject: Re: accessible banking: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> I guess so but could you ellaborate on your question. > >> >> > >> >> Johnnie Apple Seed > >> >> > >> >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> >> From: <Kurt_Mattes@bankone.com> > >> >> To: <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>; > >> >> <kpierce2000@earthlink.net>; > >> >> <John.Carpenter@pdms.com>; <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> > >> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 9:22 AM > >> >> Subject: RE: accessible banking: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Does "The law should read that anyone should be able to access > >> >> and fully use any tehnology appropriate for a task and which fits > >> >> their > >> >> needs." include any browser capable of connecting to the Internet? > >> >> > >> >> Kurt Mattes > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> -----Original Message----- > >> >> From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org]On > >> >> Behalf Of david poehlman > >> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 9:10 AM > >> >> To: Kelly Pierce; John Carpenter; wai-ig list > >> >> Subject: Re: accessible banking: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Kelly and all, the laws are flawed in this fashion. they assume lack > >> >> of > >> >> people function when the issue is lack of technology function. I just > >> >> read > >> >> a piece on this in fact from the ncd called "righting the ada" which > >> >> sadly > >> >> carries this mal assumption forward. 90 ercent or more of the issues > >> >> we > >> >> face are artificial and the sooner they are dealt with, the better. > >> >> It > >> >> is > >> >> as you point out 2005 and was not right in any age to task technology > >> >> with > >> >> setting the tone for people's lives but rather technology should be > >> >> tasked > >> >> to serve us. > >> >> > >> >> I did state in my message that this has nothing to do with law, but > >> >> perhaps > >> >> I was in error. The law should read that anyone should be able to > >> >> access > >> >> and fully use any tehnology appropriate for a task and which fits > >> >> their > >> >> needs. There are many places in the country and in the world where is > >> >> is > >> >> a > >> >> mis fit and always will be. > >> >> > >> >> Johnnie Apple Seed > >> >> > >> >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> >> From: "Kelly Pierce" <kpierce2000@earthlink.net> > >> >> To: "david poehlman" <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>; "John > >> >> Carpenter" <John.Carpenter@pdms.com>; "wai-ig list" > >> >> <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> > >> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 9:03 AM > >> >> Subject: Re: accessible banking: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> From: "david poehlman" <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com> > >> >> To: "Kelly Pierce" <kpierce2000@earthlink.net>; "John Carpenter" > >> >> <John.Carpenter@pdms.com>; "wai-ig list" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> > >> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 7:42 AM > >> >> Subject: Re: accessible banking: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Part of accessibility is choice. I should be able to access any web > >> >> > site > >> >> > with any combination of user agent and technology accessibly and it > >> >> > be > >> >> > accessible. Is this a tall order? Yes, is it necessary, yes. > >> >> > >> >> **Not under the Americans with Disabilities Act. As long as the means > >> >> of > >> >> communication made available to you is effective, I.e. allowing you to > >> >> complete a certain task, then the bank has fulfilled its access > >> >> obligations. > >> >> Under the ADA, courts view access by functional performance, not by > >> >> process. > >> >> they also don't consider optimal or preferential means but the means > >> >> that > >> >> is > >> >> sufficient to complete the specified task. You may choose not to use > >> >> Internet Explorer, but in 2005 I have not seen an argument saying that > >> >> it > >> >> is > >> >> unreasonable or insufficient to require people with disabilities only > >> >> to > >> >> use > >> >> Internet Explorer to access online banking services. It seems like > >> >> you > >> >> want > >> >> access beyond what is required beyond that of the ADA. > >> >> > >> >> Kelly > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> ********************************************************************** > >> >> This transmission may contain information that is privileged, > >> >> confidential > >> >> and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the > >> >> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, > >> >> copying, > >> >> distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including > >> >> any > >> >> reliance thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this > >> >> transmission > >> >> in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the > >> >> material > >> >> in > >> >> its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you > >> >> ********************************************************************** > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> > > >> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> > CONFIGURE YOUR E-MAIL TO SEND TEXT ONLY, see > >> > http://expita.com/nomime.html > >> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> > > >> > "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary > >> > safety deserve Neither liberty nor safety", Benjamin Franklin > >> > >> > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > >> > - > >> > 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 > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > CONFIGURE YOUR E-MAIL TO SEND TEXT ONLY, see http://expita.com/nomime.html > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary > > safety deserve Neither liberty nor safety", Benjamin Franklin > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > 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 > > > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ CONFIGURE YOUR E-MAIL TO SEND TEXT ONLY, see http://expita.com/nomime.html +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve Neither liberty nor safety", Benjamin Franklin - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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
Received on Wednesday, 2 February 2005 03:13:29 UTC