W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2012

Re: section 508 flaw?

From: Sailesh Panchang <sailesh.panchang@deque.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 17:20:05 -0500
Message-ID: <CAJi9CqpkX4b1yOYJaq7gXj2rKMwsrE-NYMEkpf_hSLqSSTe0qA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net>
Cc: "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Well I do not think that interpretation is correct. The current  and
the draft S508 rules apply to
ICT "that is procured, developed, maintained, or used".
So the change control process is supposed to create S508 compliant content.
Sailesh Panchang


On 2/8/12, Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>   Listers,
>   I am sharing the below from a network administrator who works across
> several
>   platforms.
>   She asked that I share it, as I am not grounded enough in what she
> explains
>   to comment.
>   thoughts?
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 05:27:59 -0500
>> From: Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@SHELLWORLD.NET>
>> Subject: section 508 flaw
>>
>> Revision control isn't in Section 508.  This means that an information
>> product or utility covered by Section 508 once a complaint is processed
>> gets made compliant and then the information product or utility can be
>> modified by any number of updates which do not have to pass Section 508
>> complince checks and requirements.  That makes Section 508 in its current
>> form pointless.  If a covered information product or utility within the
>> Section 508 complaint process is put under Section 508 revision control
>> and then sent out as a software or web page release, this loophole would
>> then be closed.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- Jude
>> <jdashiel-at-shellworld-dot-net>
>> <http://www.shellworld.net/~jdashiel/nj.html>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 9 February 2012 22:20:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 9 February 2012 22:20:34 GMT