- From: <deborah.kaplan@suberic.net>
- Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 09:49:00 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Samantha Bird <samanthazoe360@gmail.com>
- cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
On Fri, 29 Jun 2012, Samantha Bird wrote: > I wanted to get a few opinions as to if a testing tool would need to be > Accessible or would this be unnecessary work? Samantha, Here are some questions to ask people at your office who are arguing against making the testing tool accessible. Do you believe, either legally or ethically or simply because of sound business practice, that software that is used in places of business should be accessible to all employees? Is your employer a large enough company to be governed by the ADA's regulations itself? Would your company ever be delivering services to companies which are bound by regulations which require all contracted firms to follow ADA or similar guidelines? Are you positive that the perfect employee is not waiting right around the corner, who happens to be somebody who relies on JAWS or ZoomText or NaturallySpeaking to interact with computers? Have all of the current employees of your employer been granted a dispensation from the universe promising that none of you will ever get a mobility or vision disability? Accessibility testing tools are business software just like Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat, and the exact same constraints apply as to why these tools should be accessible. In fact, the constraints are even more relevant than for normal software, because the accessibility testing and programming community disproportionately represents professionals with disabilities. It's actually extremely likely that the perfect employee for your next corporate opening is right around the corner, and happens to be somebody who relies on JAWS or ZoomText or NaturallySpeaking to do her work. Besides which, you guys are obviously experts who know how to do it right. You might as well. :-) -Deborah Kaplan Accessibility Team Colead Dreamwidth Studios LLC
Received on Friday, 29 June 2012 13:49:33 UTC