W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2002

RE: statistics - for differences between accessible and non-acce ssible sites?

From: Denise Wood <Denise_Wood@operamail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 10:55:09 -0500
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-ID: <3C3F25EF@operamail.com>
From: SHARPE, Ian [mailto:Ian.SHARPE@cambridge.sema.slb.com]
> Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 1:33 AM
> To: WAI (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: statistics - for differences between accessible and
> non-acce ssible sites?
> Simon, couldn't agree more with your sentiment but sadly am
> not so confident that legislation will ensure sites are made accessible. As
> far as I'm aware only 508 in the US ensure sites/software purchased by US 
government be accessible. (That's my understanding anyway, maybe I'm
> wrong?) Even this limited legislation isn't even true in the UK. It should 
be!! And the rest!!

Ian you are correct in one respect. Section 508 is US legislation. However 
many other countries have legislation in place which protects the rights of 
people with disabilities and can be applied to areas such as web 

Australia, for example,  has chosen not to develop enforceable standards such 
as those developed under Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act. The reason for 
this decision is that the Australian Government believes that the Disability 
Discrimination Act of 1992 adequately covers the rights of people with 
disabilities to be able to access information and other material through the 
Web. This requirement applies to any individual or organisation developing a 
World Wide Web page in Australia, or placing or maintaining a Web page on an 
Australian server. The relevant provision of the Act is Section 24 relating to 
the provision of goods and services. The adequacy of this legislation to 
protect the rights of individuals to be able to access information from the 
web was successfully applied in Bruce Lindsay Maguire v Sydney Organising 
Committee for the Olympic Games case in which the Human Rights and Equal 
Opportunity Commission determined that:
…the respondent has discriminated against the complainant in breach of section 
24 of the DDA.
The UK also has a disability discrimination act (1995) and so do many other 
countries. Check out the policy links from the W3C web site for details of the 
relevant legislation in other countries: http://www.w3.org/WAI/Policy/


Dr Denise L Wood
Lecturer: Professional Development (online teaching and learning)
University of South Australia
CE Campus, North Terrace, Adelaide SA 5000
Ph:    (61 8) 8302 2172 / (61 8) 8302 4472 (Tuesdays & Thursdays)
Fax:  (61 8) 8302 2363 / (61 8) 8302 4390
Mob: (0413 648 260)

Email:	Denise.Wood@unisa.edu.au
WWW:	http://www.unisanet.unisa.edu.au/staff/homepage.asp?Name=Denise.Wood
Received on Friday, 11 January 2002 10:55:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:36:06 UTC