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

Re: LIFT Text Transcoder

From: Access Systems <accessys@smart.net>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 09:23:37 -0500 (EST)
To: Jon Gunderson <jongund@uiuc.edu>
cc: Adaptive Technology International <ati3@sympatico.ca>, Léonie Watson <lw@nomensa.com>, WAI Interest Group <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0602270921520.21748@smart.net>

On Mon, 27 Feb 2006, Jon Gunderson wrote:

> 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.

but section 504 has authority over any federal reciepient, and to
determine what is appropriate compliance it turns to the ATBCB for
guidance and they reference back to section 508 and W3C/WAI level 3  none
of which these software products comply with,  I checked em and they
flunked pretty badly.

Bob


>
> 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/
>
>
>

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
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 Monday, 27 February 2006 14:24:15 GMT

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