Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 6 Nov 2001 03:43:57 -0800
From:      "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com>
To:        "Mike Meyer" <mwm@mired.org>
Cc:        <advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG>, <chat@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   RE: NatWest? no thanks
Message-ID:  <002901c166b8$51faefa0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>
In-Reply-To: <15334.59771.604079.307131@guru.mired.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Mike Meyer [mailto:mwm@mired.org]
>Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 11:33 AM
>To: Ted Mittelstaedt
>Cc: advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG; chat@FreeBSD.ORG
>Subject: RE: NatWest? no thanks
>
>
>The correct solution is to detect the feature - or lack thereof - in
>question, and respond appropriately to that. See <URL:
>http://www.idiom.com/~mwm/supported-myth.html > for a longer essay on
>that topic. [That's a temporary location while I'm waiting on a the
>hardware needed to fix my server.]
>

Yes, I agree that this is the correct way, but I have little hope that
web designers that are dead-set to code to specific browsers are going
to give a damn about doing it the right way.  These are designers that
don't give a rip about the users accessing the site, they are doing what
they are doing purely for the site owner's benefit.

>
>Actually, those are two different points. At least, I think they
>are. The first is a complaint that many web sites are poorly designed,
>and don't make use of the ability to display an alternative if the
>media used isn't supported by the browser. The second is trying to
>make the point that the information provided may not be usable by the
>person doing the browsing.
>

Correct.

>Which ignores the many cases where the person driving the browser
>isn't the final consumer of the information.
>

But this also ignores the point that some kinds of information must be
used interactively, in short the person driving the browser MUST be the
final consumer of the information.

For example, how would ADA requirements for blind-accessiblity be useful
for a on-line certification test for, say, a hunter?  (gun safety)  Are
you going to argue that states that require hunters to pass online
gun safety tests before getting Elk tags are going to have to make sure
that those tests are blind-accessible?  Is this so that the blind people
can pass the gun safety test so they can get an Elk tag and go out in
the woods with their gun and hunt it?

>
>I don't think you've made your case, for three different reasons. The
>one that's been discussed is that it's hard to determine exactly when
>some page would never be used by someone who is disabled.

Ah.  So, because something's hard to do we are going to take the cop-out
excuse and end up with stupid things like online gun-safety tests that
blind people can take so that people that monitor ADA compliance don't have to
think.

>The second
>is that we've been concentrating on the blind, but there are other
>impairments that effect the browsing experience that need to be
>considered.
>

Quite true.  I'm sure that wheelchair accessible people are going to
be lining up to get Elk tags too, right after the blind hunters.

This is my point again - you say it needs to be considered, yet you
aren't advocating consideration, you seem to be just advocating a blanket
"lets slap on ADA to everything regardless and be done with it"

>Finally, as someone who consults professionally on creating accessible
>web sites, it's that the cost of creating an accessible web site is
>*very low*. Adding ramps to a building changes the look of the
>building, and may be a fundamental design change. All the W3C-designed
>standards provide for an alternative presentation if the browser
>doesn't use the primary one. All it takes to build an accessible web
>site is *using* those things with intelligence. Unfortunately, web
>site designers seem to be seriously lacking in that last ingredient.
>

Sigh.  You know the saddest thing that I find in this whole thread is
that at one time web designing used to be a respectible profession.
But look at how all the idiots and their crap websites have wrecked it.
Today, you cannot trust an arbitrary web designer to be intelligent
enough to use their brains and think for a change.  So, the only answer
seems to be to ram ADA compliance down all of their throats.  It might
keep the idiots inline but it's going to be a pain for the rest of them
because sure as shooting there's going to be a blind person bitching
about not being able to take the gun safety test and get his Elk tag.

Ted Mittelstaedt                                       tedm@toybox.placo.com
Author of:                           The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide
Book website:                          http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?002901c166b8$51faefa0$1401a8c0>