|
This is an interesting area, with lots of opinion on implementations. It gets messy, and quick. So it's normally part of the ADA to make things accessible. But with building, one can retrofit an older building that wasn't accessible with a certain percentage, and still avoid ADA compliance. I had that discussion in an architecture class, how to strictly comply with the law, whilst still skirting around it. The ADA as far as I know also applies to online as well, but the percentage change of a building doesn't really have an analogue with online. The justification was purely money - disabled people work lower wage jobs, and aren't worth the money spent in upgrading a facility. It's disgusting logic, but there you have it. I also think of DRM. It prevents end users from fair use (and also carte blanch copying).. Yet it also prevents converting the audio track to text with something like Sphinx. And with the deaf/hard of hearing, many sites prevent downloading and transcribing automatically. Youtube is trying with automatic transcription, and it certainly is a start. It's still hard, given the amount of sounds that are non-spoken that CC incorporates (sound of drums far away) (eerie music with footsteps). And as mjevans said, what about an individual who releases content and doesn't have the resources to do ADA compliance? Is the correct answer is to ban said content? That seems to go in a really wrong direction as well. But we saw this earlier with (I forget which university) whom deleted all their videos primarily because they were dumped free online, without closed captioning. Instead, we all lost. And as a developer, how do I determine how to write something that's disability friendly? It seems that flat text HTML with pictures and little/no JS seem to be the way. With pictures, include a alt text with a general description. With a video, include a transcript. Make sure the website will work effectively with Lynx because screen scrapers will tab through when reading.... But can I be sure that the above is correct? One thing I'm sure of, is that I'm missing a great deal of stuff. Red/Green or Blue/Yellow colorblindness, reduced vision, font issues (dyslexic fonts), Captcha handicap issues, and plenty more. How can I guarantee that I'm not just complying with the law, but makes my site usable? As far as I can tell, make a good attempt and wait for a lawsuit. Then again, coming back to what was told of us in class - its an ugly "formula", but the disabled don't offer much in the way of economic gain, so why is there a reason to cater to them? (No, it's not what I believe, but a hard set of rules that people like Architects consider with regards to pricing with clients. I see no reason why this financial rubric isn't also considered online.) |
In my opinion we should require that all buildings be accessible on the ground floor(s). Those who medically cannot handle stairs should be given priority to the ground floor. (this includes any store that might want to sell to handicapped)
Of course wheelchairs are only one type of accessibility. Deaf and/or blind people can be expected to need some accommodation as well, but their needs are much different (and cheaper!) than the wheelchair bound.