- From: Kelly Pierce <kpierce2000@earthlink.net>
- Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 21:00:34 -0600
- To: "Access Systems" <accessys@smart.net>, <Kurt_Mattes@bankone.com>
- Cc: <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>, <John.Carpenter@pdms.com>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
bob, I wonder how many jobs are calibrated so the end user runs "Linux operating system, Lynx browser, and emacspeak text to audio adaptive software"? I suspect very few. The ADA prohibition against charging for an accommodation does not pertain to personal devices, such as eyeglasses or wheelchairs. if the screen reader is on a public terminal, then the entity with the terminal is responsible for the cost. If the screen reader is on a user's own machine, then it would likely be considered a personal device and the end user is responsible for the cost, just like a wheelchair user is responsible for the cost of the wheelchair in order to use a wheelchair accessible building. Kelly ----- Original Message ----- From: "Access Systems" <accessys@smart.net> To: <Kurt_Mattes@bankone.com> Cc: <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>; <kpierce2000@earthlink.net>; <John.Carpenter@pdms.com>; <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 10:50 AM Subject: RE: accessible banking: > On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 Kurt_Mattes@bankone.com wrote: > >> What I am thinking about is how the poverty issue impacts the security >> issue. >> I describe it as a poverty issue since the statement "The law should read >> that anyone should be able to access and fully use any tehnology >> appropriate >> for a task and which fits their needs." includes people without >> disabilities >> and I believe is an attempt to include less economically fortunate >> members >> of the communities addressed by the W3C WAI Guidelines. Poverty is not >> an >> accessibility issue unique to these communities as it impacts many >> outside >> of these communities. > > but people with disabilities are more likely to be below the poverty level > >> The problem arises when an Internet user fortunate enough to have an >> early >> 1990's era system attempts to visit a secure site. This system is >> probably > > or those persons not using the Windows operating system, such as Mac,s, > Linux and a whole range of open source products > >> not capable of supporting current encryption standards. Does the secure >> site >> owner have an obligation to provide this user access at the risk of >> compromising security? > > however demanding that a user purchase an expensive piece of specific > software is not a security issue. > >> Or does the "...appropriate for a task..." part of >> this statement mean this era browser would be exempt from the site owners >> obligation? And if we make this exception, is it not also fair to say >> users of "free" browsers capable of supporting current encryption >> standards >> and 'modeling' IE browser behavior have access to any site optimized for >> accessibility with an IE browser? >> >> Given that non-Internet Explorer browsers are now able to 'model' the >> behavior >> of an Internet Explorer browser, a distinction between the product >> Internet Explorer and the behavior of this product needs to be made. To >> say >> a site is only accessible with an IE browser can mean two different >> things. >> Either the product Internet Explorer or the behavior of an IE browser is >> needed. "Free" browsers able to 'model' Internet Explorer behavior >> provide >> the means for less economically fortunate users to access sites optimized >> for the Internet Explorer browser without incurring any expense or >> exposure >> to any of the Internet Explorer security issues often cited. > > however how does this allow people using specific adaptive software use > the site, for example a cheap (poor) visually impaired user. accessing > the site via Linux operating system, Lynx browser, and emacspeak text to > audio adaptive software. > > 508 (as does title II and III of ADA) prohibits requiring individuals to > purchase anything other users do not have to purchase.. if requiring IE, > does that mean that the secure site must provide free a copy of JAWS ??? > > Bob > >> >> >> Kurt Mattes >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: david poehlman [mailto:david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 9:37 AM >> To: Mattes, Kurt (Bank One); kpierce2000@earthlink.net; >> John.Carpenter@pdms.com; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org >> Subject: Re: accessible banking: >> >> >> I guess so but could you ellaborate on your question. >> >> Johnnie Apple Seed >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: <Kurt_Mattes@bankone.com> >> To: <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>; >> <kpierce2000@earthlink.net>; >> <John.Carpenter@pdms.com>; <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 9:22 AM >> Subject: RE: accessible banking: >> >> >> >> Does "The law should read that anyone should be able to access >> and fully use any tehnology appropriate for a task and which fits their >> needs." include any browser capable of connecting to the Internet? >> >> Kurt Mattes >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org]On >> Behalf Of david poehlman >> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 9:10 AM >> To: Kelly Pierce; John Carpenter; wai-ig list >> Subject: Re: accessible banking: >> >> >> >> Kelly and all, the laws are flawed in this fashion. they assume lack of >> people function when the issue is lack of technology function. I just >> read >> a piece on this in fact from the ncd called "righting the ada" which >> sadly >> carries this mal assumption forward. 90 ercent or more of the issues we >> face are artificial and the sooner they are dealt with, the better. It >> is >> as you point out 2005 and was not right in any age to task technology >> with >> setting the tone for people's lives but rather technology should be >> tasked >> to serve us. >> >> I did state in my message that this has nothing to do with law, but >> perhaps >> I was in error. The law should read that anyone should be able to access >> and fully use any tehnology appropriate for a task and which fits their >> needs. There are many places in the country and in the world where is is >> a >> mis fit and always will be. >> >> Johnnie Apple Seed >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Kelly Pierce" <kpierce2000@earthlink.net> >> To: "david poehlman" <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>; "John >> Carpenter" <John.Carpenter@pdms.com>; "wai-ig list" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 9:03 AM >> Subject: Re: accessible banking: >> >> >> >> >> From: "david poehlman" <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com> >> To: "Kelly Pierce" <kpierce2000@earthlink.net>; "John Carpenter" >> <John.Carpenter@pdms.com>; "wai-ig list" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 7:42 AM >> Subject: Re: accessible banking: >> >> >> > Part of accessibility is choice. I should be able to access any web >> > site >> > with any combination of user agent and technology accessibly and it be >> > accessible. Is this a tall order? Yes, is it necessary, yes. >> >> **Not under the Americans with Disabilities Act. As long as the means of >> communication made available to you is effective, I.e. allowing you to >> complete a certain task, then the bank has fulfilled its access >> obligations. >> Under the ADA, courts view access by functional performance, not by >> process. >> they also don't consider optimal or preferential means but the means that >> is >> sufficient to complete the specified task. You may choose not to use >> Internet Explorer, but in 2005 I have not seen an argument saying that it >> is >> unreasonable or insufficient to require people with disabilities only to >> use >> Internet Explorer to access online banking services. It seems like you >> want >> access beyond what is required beyond that of the ADA. >> >> Kelly >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ********************************************************************** >> This transmission may contain information that is privileged, >> confidential >> and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the >> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, >> distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including any >> reliance thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this >> transmission >> in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the material >> in >> its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you >> ********************************************************************** >> >> >> >> > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > CONFIGURE YOUR E-MAIL TO SEND TEXT ONLY, see http://expita.com/nomime.html > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > "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 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 Wednesday, 2 February 2005 03:00:43 UTC