W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2008

RE: Screenuser needed for remote testing

From: <Accessys@smart.net>
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 10:48:59 -0500 (EST)
To: Patrick Lauke <P.H.Lauke@salford.ac.uk>
cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0812011038570.13095@fzneg.arg>


the USA rules are very clear that it cannot "Cost" a user with a
disability any more than it will cost a non disabled user.  Therefore
if something will work with for example Jaws which costs quite a bit
but won't work with say EMACspeak which is open source and free then
the only way a site would comply would be if it either works with the
free version or Jaws were provided free to those who could not use the
site otherwise.

the "most common" etc etc is the same excuse used to exclude disabled
people in the past.  it cost's no more to write correct code than it
does to write messed up code.

I am not completely familiar with the UK DDA but I do know the USA
ADA and other codes.  and 28CFR36.301(c) & 28CFR36.203 make it very
clear that it cannot "Cost" a disabled person more to use a service
than it would a non disabled person.   The escape clause for
businesses is to make sure the system functions effectively using one
of the free auxiliary aids such as EMACspeak, otherwise they are
"Forcing one to purchase an expensive piece of software that non
disabled persons are not required to, this is called disparate
treatment and it is prohibited.


 Bob


disclaimer, I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.




On Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Patrick Lauke wrote:

>
> > Accessys@smart.net
>
> > remember all certifications and regulations are operating system
> neutral.
>
> Just want to throw in here that, with my WCAG 2 hat on, you need to
> ensure that you use technologies that are "accessibility supported".
> That doesn't mean that they work on each and every OS/permutation, but
> that they're supported in widely-distributed user agents. And, for
> better or worse, Windows with JAWS or Windows Eyes seem to have the lion
> share of the market, so time spent testing here will yield the most
> direct benefits for the largest number of users.
>
> With a UK DDA hat on, it comes down to "reasonable adjustments". If
> demonstrably a site is done to standards, and has been tested with the
> most used (by a large margin) AT/OS combination, and to the best of the
> developer's knowledge it works fine, reasonable steps have been taken.
>
> Yes, in an ideal world you'd test all platforms, all types of AT, all
> levels of user (novice to power-user), cultural backgrounds, native
> language, etc etc...but on tight budget, with limited time, and a very
> small number or test participants, you've got to be pragmatic and go for
> the most bang for the buck.
>
> P
> ________________________________
> Patrick H. Lauke
> Web Editor
> Enterprise & Development
> University of Salford
> Room 113, Faraday House
> Salford, Greater Manchester
> M5 4WT
> UK
>
> T +44 (0) 161 295 4779
> webmaster@salford.ac.uk
>
> www.salford.ac.uk
>
> A GREATER MANCHESTER UNIVERSITY
>

-
end
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
occasionally a true patriot must defend his country from its' government
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"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/MIME 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, 1 December 2008 15:49:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:29 GMT