W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2003

Re: No JavaScript for previous page and print screen

From: William R Williams <wrwilliams@fs.fed.us>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 15:44:49 -0700
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF10AE22A8.CDB5D734-ON88256D2D.007B465C@r5.fs.fed.us>

Well, if your concern is that the feds cannot get their act together on
this, you might as well contact the WhiteHouse as well:

Data tables coded incorrectly --  1194.22 provision (g), (h)

No alternative for video --  1194.22 provision (a), (b)

. . . and these observations were based on a very quick review. Of course,
these violations of Section 508 are breaking the law. Plus, with 508, we're
not even talking about true accessibility.

My own agency has plenty of violations, as I've stated before, which means
we don't have our act together either. Much of the time, we cannot even
post a 1-page news release without someone thinking a pdf will suffice. And
now, as I prepare to assist with presenting a 400-page technical report on
the web (with plenty of tables & charts), planners want to post only pdf,
rtf documents because "going the extra mile" for a mark-up presentation is
not cost-effective. There's hardly any "wherewithall" on the fed's part
regarding accessible E&IT. Is rtf even a viable option for the web?

Bill Williams

I don't know who the heck made that rule"My organization only obligates us
to meet priority 1 of 508" but I will tell you this, I will be looking very
close at this site. The US Government did 508, adopted 508 set deadlines
that very few have taken seriously and the last time I checked, it must
follow its own rules. It is a shame that the government of these United
States can't even get their act together.
Who is in charge of the web at CDC. I am going to talk to them.

Received on Wednesday, 21 May 2003 18:48:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:36:15 UTC