W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2006

Re: LIFT Text Transcoder

From: Jon Gunderson <jongund@uiuc.edu>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 08:02:28 -0600
To: Adaptive Technology International <ati3@sympatico.ca>, Léonie Watson <lw@nomensa.com>, WAI Interest Group <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-Id: <2025fc9f.912e49e1.823e700@expms1.cites.uiuc.edu>
No.  Section 508 has limited legal interpretations to 
websites actually hosted by the united states federal 
government.  Although in other contexts in might serve as a 
defacto minimum standard for other types of litigation in 
the U.S.

Jon


---- Original message ----
>Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 18:03:19 -0500
>From: "Adaptive Technology International" 
<ati3@sympatico.ca>  
>Subject: Re: LIFT Text Transcoder  
>To: "Jon Gunderson" <jongund@uiuc.edu>, Léonie Watson 
<lw@nomensa.com>, "WAI Interest Group" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
>
>Does Section 508 can serve for international standard for 
the web
>accessibility         issues?
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jon Gunderson" <jongund@uiuc.edu>
>To: "Léonie Watson" <lw@nomensa.com>; "WAI Interest Group"
><w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
>Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 10:12 AM
>Subject: RE: LIFT Text Transcoder
>
>
>> It should also be pointed out that in both Section 508 and
>> WCAG 1.0 a text only site is not considered an accessible
>> solution.  Basically the requirements state that the 
author
>> has determined that the primary site CANNOT be made
>> accessible, and the text only site provides some kind of
>> second class access to the content.
>>
>> I think there is some kind of assumption that "Text Only" 
is
>> some how equivalent to making the primary site accessible.
>>
>> Jon
>>
>>
>> ---- Original message ----
>> >Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:27 -0000
>> >From: Léonie Watson <lw@nomensa.com>
>> >Subject: RE: LIFT Text Transcoder
>> >To: "WAI Interest Group" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
>> >
>> >
>> >Patrick Lauke wrote:
>> >
>> >"I'll be contentious and say: if a site is built well 
from
>> the start (e.g. separating content from presentation - no
>> tables for layout, for instance - and proper structuring 
via
>> headings etc) there is no difference between using 
a "proper"
>> text browser, screen reader, or other AT with content 
that's
>> been passed through the transcoder. In my mind, this is 
only
>> useful if the original site is not built with standards 
etc to
>> begin with...a band-aid solution, at best."
>> >
>> > Eloquently put. I'd add to this technical argument by 
saying
>> that for many people a text only option is a second class
>> solution.
>> >
>> > It's rare to find a text only site that offers the same
>> quality of content as a primary site. Even with tools 
such as
>> Betsie or the transcoder, as Patrick later said, there are
>> always elements that can't be touched by this kind of 
technology.
>> >
>> > If the site is designed right in the first place, 
there's no
>> need to take on the burden of an additional site, paying 
the
>> licence for another tool to make up the shortfall of poor
>> design and no need to relegate people to a second best 
site.
>> >
>> >Regards,
>> >Léonie.
>> >
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org
>> [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Patrick 
H. Lauke
>> >Sent: Thursday, 23 February 2006 19:05
>> >To: WAI Interest Group
>> >Subject: Re: LIFT Text Transcoder
>> >
>> >
>> >ATI wrote:
>> >
>> >> I have the following two questions if anyone has used 
or
>> using the
>> >> LIFT Text Transcoder
>> http://transcoder.usablenet.com/tt/index.html

>> >>
>> >> 1. Can I use the LIFT Text Transcoder offline? I mean, 
if I
>> provide
>> >> the web content or the product by CDS, can a blind 
user use
>> the LIFT
>> >> Text Transcoder with out connecting through the 
internet line?
>> >> You know, some people are using very slow internet
>> connection and
>> >> others even don't have internet connection at all.
>> >
>> > From what I can see, it's a server-side solution that 
needs
>> to fetch web content, transform it, and then re-deliver 
it via
>> the browser...so my guess would be no.
>> >
>> >> 2. who is the main beneficiaries of LIFT Text 
Transcoder?
>> >
>> >I'll be contentious and say: if a site is built well 
from the
>> start (e.g. separating content from presentation - no 
tables
>> for layout, for instance - and proper structuring via 
headings
>> etc) there is no difference between using a "proper" text
>> browser, screen reader, or other AT with content that's 
been
>> passed through the transcoder. In my mind, this is only 
useful
>> if the original site is not built with standards etc to 
begin
>> with...a band-aid solution, at best. And, if the original 
site
>> is *badly* inaccessible, even the text transcoder won't be
>> able to magically make it accessible (e.g. if you have 
videos
>> embedded in pages, not using structural markup, or similar
>> situations, LIFT won't automatically generate text 
transcripts
>> or give proper structure to the pages either).
>> >I'd argue that it's a server-side solution to a problem 
that,
>> if the site is designed/built properly, does not exist. 
The
>> core functionality and a lot of the customisation options 
that
>> the transcoder provides (such as changing font size or 
colour)
>> are things that, in my view, should all be handled client-
side.
>> >
>> >P
>> >--
>> >Patrick H. Lauke
>> 
>__________________________________________________________
>> >re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used 
postpositively
>> [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
>> www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
>> http://redux.deviantart.com

>> __________________________________________________________
>> >Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force
>> http://webstandards.org/

>> __________________________________________________________
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> Jon Gunderson, Ph.D.
>> Director of IT Accessibility Services
>> Campus Information Technologies and Educational Services 
(CITES)
>> and
>> Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information 
Technology
>> Disability Resources and Education Services (DRES)
>>
>> Voice: (217) 244-5870
>> Fax: (217) 333-0248
>> Cell: (217) 714-6313
>>
>> E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu
>>
>> WWW: http://cita.rehab.uiuc.edu/

>> WWW: https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/jongund/www/

>>
>>
>>
>


Jon Gunderson, Ph.D.
Director of IT Accessibility Services
Campus Information Technologies and Educational Services (CITES)
and 
Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
Disability Resources and Education Services (DRES)

Voice: (217) 244-5870
Fax: (217) 333-0248
Cell: (217) 714-6313

E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu

WWW: http://cita.rehab.uiuc.edu/

WWW: https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/jongund/www/



Received on Monday, 27 February 2006 14:02:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:24 GMT