- From: Reidy Brown <rbrown@blackboard.com>
- Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 19:01:12 -0500
- To: "'donbery@swbell.net'" <donbery@swbell.net>, "'w3c-wai-ig@w3.org'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Don The Utah State University has created accessibility guidelines. Also, the California community colleges have accessibility requirements that are determined by state law. Texas and New York's accessibility laws are being interpreted to cover public universities, and may be of interest to you as well. (I've included some additional information on this at the bottom of my email-- I compiled it about half a year ago, but it should still be useful.) Also, I'm the Accessibility Coordinator at Blackboard, so if you have any specific questions about the software, feel free to ask. We're aggressively pursuing the goal of making our software accessible, working on both short-term code retrofits to increase accessibility and longer term R&D projects involving customizable accessible interfaces. (We're also putting together an accessibility/usability advisory group to make sure that we're properly prioritizing accessibility issues, and that our solutions address the problems appropriately. If you're interested in participating, please let me know at rbrown@blackboard.com.) In January 2001, Blackboard will release Blackboard 5.5.1. Accessibility enhancements for this version include the following items. · All system images will have alt tags, and instructors will be able to add alt tags to uploaded images in the content creation areas of the software (with the exception of optional assessment images, which should be described in the question or answer text). · Framesets will be appropriately titled and will have meaningful <noframes> content, describing the functionality of the frames layout . · Data tables will be optimized for use with screen readers by adding attributes to associate column headings with table content. · One of the largest challenges for non-visual users of internet applications is understanding the layout and context of a web page. Blackboard provides online Help documentation in both HTML and PDF format, which describes in detail the layout, context, and functionality of each Blackboard feature, as well as giving instructions on using these features. In actuality, much of this capability exists in the current version of Blackboard. The 5.5.1 release is focusing on filling in any places that functionality might be missing, and bringing these features up to 100% implementation. We're committed to building our software out to the W3C Web Accessibility Initiative Guidelines, and if you're interested, I can send you more information on accessibility projects that we're working on here at Blackboard. Reidy Brown ------------------------------------------- Reidy Brown Accessibility Coordinator/ Software Engineer Blackboard, Inc. 1899 L. St., NW, 5th Floor Washington, DC 20036 (202) 463-4860 x236 ------------------------------------------- ----------------------- · International and US regulations: http://www.w3.org/WAI/References/Policy · "It is required that all California community college instructional Web sites created or substantially modified after adoption of these guidelines [WAI Accessibility Guidelines] be Priority l compliant. It is strongly recommended that all California community college instructional Web sites created or substantially modified after adoption of these guidelines be Priority 2 compliant." (The Chancellor's Office of the California Community Colleges document on access guidelines for distance education. http://www.htctu.fhda.edu/dlguidelines/final%20dl%20guidelines.htm) · The State of New York has adopted the W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines as a means to provide optimal access to State agency web sites and the content therein. As a matter of policy, each agency is responsible for applying the most current version of these guidelines in the design, creation and maintenance of any official New York State agency web site. It is expected that the guidelines will be applied to all newly developed content/pages effective immediately. Existing content/pages should be prioritized and modified over time (but no later than one year from the date of this technology policy). Web content shall conform with level "A," satisfying all priority one checkpoints. The URL for the NYS policy is http://www.irm.state.ny.us/policy/99-3.htm. This policy applies to the New York State University system · Texas requirements, effective July 2000: In summary the proposed rules (in their present state) would require: Elimination of Priority 1 and 2 Web Content Accessibility errors. · Utah State University: Like New York's new standards, U.S.U.'s guidelines are also based on the w3c standards. The policy includes all of the priority 1 and 2 standards, as well as some of the priority 3 standards... ...Enforcement will not begin for several months (probably not until late next year) but the drive to make the pages accessible will go into full effect at the beginning of the year." · Lt. Governor Wicker of the State of North Carolina announced the appointment of a special task force to ensure that both employees and citizens with disabilities have access to electronic and information technology. (see attached email) · "...As you know, Portugal is the first European country where web accessibility is mandatory. This legislation was an initiative of the Ministry of Science and Technology. I think that people from EU countries should join efforts and take this conference as a milestone to promote web accessibility in Europe." (Francisco Godinho, Co-coordinator of the Petition for the Accessibility of the Portuguese, in attached email) · The Australian Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission has announced a directive from the Attorney General to address Internet accessibility. See http://www.hreoc.gov.au/disability_rights/current_inquiries/ecom/ecom.html · "...in late spring, the Access Board's Electronic and Information Technology Access Advisory Committee presented its report to the Board on what those [accessibility] standards should be. Basically, they recommended Double-A of the web content guidelines. They recommended user agents and authoring tools meet Priorities 1 and 2 of their respective guidelines. That's why most of us in government who pay attention to such things are expecting Double-A as our target, even though nothing has been finalized. (Adam Guasch-Melendez, EEOC, speaking about future ADA requirements, in attached email) · "The law on whether online providers are public accommodations isn't clear. "There's nothing that addresses it squarely in the statute," said Gary D. Friedman, a New York labor and employment partner at Chicago's Mayer Brown & Platt."... "However, the 1st Circuit-where the NFB sued-has held otherwise. In a 1994 case, Car Parts Distribution Center v. Automotive Wholesalers Association, 37 F.3d 12, the court held that being a public accommodation doesn't demand a physical structure for people to enter. "What the plaintiffs in the AOL case are arguing represents a rather expansive interpretation of the ADA," said Edward S. Mazurek, a labor and employment partner at Morgan, Lewis & Bockius L.L.P. in Philadelphia. In addition to affecting on-line businesses, such a reading of the statute could affect other service providers, such as telecommunications companies and insurance companies, which could be forced to alter access to their services to accommodate people with disabilities." (Ritchenya A. Shepherd, The National Law Journal, in attached email, and http://www.lawnewsnetwork.com/stories/A9537-1999Nov12.html)
Received on Monday, 30 October 2000 19:08:12 UTC