[Y_Y]

https://www.ada.gov/resources/web-guidance/ (for those of us from non-default countries please modify as apply)

Why is it that you can get people to take the law seriously when it comes to ensuring there's a wheelchair ramp for a new building, but not for a comparatively simpler and cheaper thing like a website that a screen reader can use?

I know that laws are slow to change and the changers of laws mostly treat computers with bewilderment and suspicion. I know that only thirty years ago the web really was the wild west whereas there have been building codes for thousands of years.

What I don't understand is how there seems to be neither voluntary compliance not significant enforcement.

[Izkata]

> state and local governments and businesses open to the public

Not all businesses are covered under this law, so it doesn't really make sense that an online equivalent would cover all websites. Not to mention private property.

(Quick edit, rewrote to make the meaning I intended clearer)

[Y_Y]

Good point. If you look at the Title 3 cases further down that page you'll see that they do have a relatively broad interpretation of "open to the public", e.g. an online test-prep provider and an online grocery-delivery site. It isn't really clear to me who's included under that category, but it's certainly a significant proportion of popular websites.

[superkuh]

Would it apply to a personal website run by a human with no profit motive if it's "open to the public"? That would be very nasty.

I'm all for accessibility and all my sites can be easily read by screen readers and nvaigated by the blind/etc. But if this law means violent force can be used against me if I make a website that is not accessible it would be terrrible.

[Y_Y]

Is your personal website a business?

[patrakov]

It is not "comparatively simpler." For starters, sighted people usually do not know how to use a screen reader or how blind people navigate web pages.