USA & 508, Re: SPAM(10.1) Re: OFF TOPIC - Shame on Google

'All things' Section 508
http://www.section508.gov/

Co-signed Memo from Office of Management and Budget, and Office of Federal
Procurement Policy
http://www.buyaccessible.org/documents/OMB_Accessibility_Federal_EIT_1107.pdf

Bill Williams



                                                                           
             "Joachim                                                      
             Andersson"                                                    
             <joachim.andersso                                          To 
             n@etu.se>                 "David Poehlman"                    
             Sent by:                  <poehlman1@comcast.net>             
             w3c-wai-ig-reques                                          cc 
             t@w3.org                  w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org, "William 
                                       R Williams" <wrwilliams@fs.fed.us>, 
                                       "Accessys@smart.net"                
             09/05/2008 04:10          <accessys@smart.net>, "John Foliot" 
             AM                        <foliot@wats.ca>, "Harry Loots"     
                                       <harry.loots@ieee.org>, "James      
                                       Craig" <jcraig@apple.com>, "wai-ig  
                                       list" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>,          
                                       wai-xtech@w3.org,                   
                                       webaim-forum@list.webaim.org        
                                                                   Subject 
                                       Re: SPAM(10.1) Re: OFF TOPIC -      
                                       Shame on Google                     
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           




Thank you for an interesting answer. Is there an online source for this
information where I can read more about it Bill?

2008/9/5 David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>
  or ada.

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: "William R Williams" <wrwilliams@fs.fed.us>
  To: <w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org>
  Cc: "Accessys@smart.net" <accessys@smart.net>; "John Foliot"
  <foliot@wats.ca>; "Harry Loots" <harry.loots@ieee.org>; "James Craig"
  <jcraig@apple.com>; "Joachim Andersson" <joachim.andersson@etu.se>;
  "wai-ig
  list" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>; <w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org>; <wai-xtech@w3.org
  >;
  <webaim-forum@list.webaim.org>
  Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 6:09 PM
  Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC - Shame on Google



  The law in the USA is called Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act (29
  U.S.C. 794d), as amended by the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (P.L.
  105-220), August 7, 1998. It's scope is limited to Federal Departments
  and
  Agencies. There are no real enforcement mechanisms. Only an "individual
  with a disability may file a complaint alleging that a Federal department
  or agency fails to comply" with the law.

  The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) requires agencies to acquire
  accessible electronic and information unless an exception applies and is
  documented. Across all agencies, an assessment in late-2007 showed that
  only 3% of the solicitations that included electronic and information
  technology properly included the Section 508 standards.

  Bill Williams




              David Woolley
              <forums@david-woo
              lley.me.uk>                                                To
              Sent by:                  Joachim Andersson
              w3c-wai-ig-reques         <joachim.andersson@etu.se>
              t@w3.org                                                   cc
                                        "Accessys@smart.net"
                                        <accessys@smart.net>, Harry Loots
              09/04/2008 02:36          <harry.loots@ieee.org>, James Craig
              PM                        <jcraig@apple.com>, John Foliot
                                        <foliot@wats.ca>, wai-ig list
                                        <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>,
                                        "wai-xtech@w3.org WAI-XTECH"
                                        <wai-xtech@w3.org>,
                                        webaim-forum@list.webaim.org
                                                                    Subject
                                        Re: OFF TOPIC - Shame on Google











  Joachim Andersson wrote:
  > If someone hit me in the face I would think twice about making an
  effort
  > to help him, wouldn't you? I'm from Sweden. The country where
  everyone's
  > complaining, noone's doing anything about things and the complaints
  > lining up.
  >
  > In my line of work I meet many people with disabilities of all kinds,
  > who are very competent and they're doing a great job working with web
  > accessibility and solutions to help others. But these people are those
  > that don't march and such. They have found other, more effective ways
  of
  > reaching their goals.
  >
  > I realize the importance of marching and so on, but 1975 is another
  time
  > than 2008. In Sweden, Canada and the United States there are laws on
  how
  > accessibility should be a part of development. In Canada and the United

  Are they enforced?  In the UK such laws exist but are not enforced.
  Even where companies have policies, when it actually comes to buying,
  the supplier and buyer often find ways to get round them.  The same goes
  for electromagnetic compatibility, a subject dear to the heart of
  another minority, amateur radio operators.



  --
  David Woolley
  Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want.
  RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam,
  that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.

Received on Friday, 5 September 2008 17:06:57 UTC