Dept. of Justice Considers Web For ADA 296
Posted
by
CmdrTaco
from the this-can-only-end-well dept.
from the this-can-only-end-well dept.
beetle496 noted a blog entry saying "The Department of Justice (DOJ) announced an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) on the Accessibility of Web Information and Services Provided by Entities Covered by the ADA (i.e., State and Local Government Entities and Public Accommodations). You can read the fact sheet, or the entire notice. In short, the Department is seeking comments on their desire to revise regulation to 'establish specific requirements for State and local governments and public accommodations to make their websites accessible to individuals with disabilities.' The Department is seeking specific comment on many things including the standards they should adopt, and if there should be any exemptions for certain entities (e.g., small business) before they publish their Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. This is amazing news! The impact that this will have for individuals with disabilities cannot be overemphasized. It is time for our digital society to forever include individuals of all abilities. The period of public comment is open for 180 days."
Re:Regulations.gov page isn't remotely 508-complia (Score:3, Informative)
I should clarify: ALT tags exist for many of the pictures but they aren't useful tags. One is "close". As in close the door? As in close but no cigar? Tagging a pic with "logo" doesn't tell the user what distinguishes it from other logos.
Re:Good news...? (Score:3, Informative)
BUT BUT BUT you are SO WRONG! (Score:3, Informative)
You are being SO FREAKING unfair,
"In 1970, Playboy became the first gentleman's magazine to be printed in braille."
and they deserve SERIOUS kudos for that..
they have been doing it for 40! years, and you just GUESSED that they were in default?
Damn man.. give Playboy their props.. who the hell cared about the disabled in the 70's?
Playboy, thats who....
Re:Good news...? (Score:2, Informative)
True, but many cars are equipped with this thing called the "back seat", and most come equipped with a matching thing called a "back window". A back-seat passenger on the driver's side can reach an ATM just as easily as the driver can.
So, while it's obviously somewhat rare, the Braille on drive-up ATMs does actually get used occasionally.
However, your second point is the "give the man a cookie" one. That's exactly why drive-up ATMs have Braille. Because all ATMs do. Building a separate non-Braille version would be more expensive than just standardizing on having Braille. One keyboard, one assembly line, one SKU in stock.
That's also why almost all PC power supplies can take 110V or 220V input. Even with the extra cost involved in building a dual-mode transformer, it's cheaper than building two models and tracking them separately.
Re:I know businesses that ended because of the ADA (Score:2, Informative)
Why did he need a loan for an ADA compliant ramp? [disabilitysystems.com]
Re:I know businesses that ended because of the ADA (Score:2, Informative)
If the rules were ignored when they originally built the place, then it's hard to feel sorry for them.
If the store had been in operation for two generations, then the ADA rules did not exist when they "built the place."
"Forced speech" - a First Amendment issue (Score:3, Informative)
A federal law compelling websites to be redesigned for defectives raises First Amendment issues. It's "forced speech".
In general, "forced speech" can be required in commercial contexts only. This has been litigated a few times [bu.edu] with regard to the Internet and the ADA. OKBridge [okbridge.com] won on summary judgement; they don't have to make their online bridge site "accessible". (They did put in a large-type option, but you still have to be able to see the cards to play.) AOL settled with the National Federation for the Blind, and AOL made the next version of their client program more compatible with screen reader programs.
The Department of Justice recognizes this. In their notice of proposed rulemaking, they write "It is the Department's intention to regulate only governmental entities and public accommodations covered by the ADA that provide goods, services, programs, or activities to the public via Web sites on the Internet. Although some litigants have asserted that ``the Internet'' itself should be considered a place of public accommodation, the Department does not address this issue here. The Department believes that title III reaches the Web sites of entities that provide goods or services that fall within the 12 categories of ``public accommodations,'' as defined by the statute and regulations. Because the Department is focused on the goods and services of public accommodations that operate exclusively or through some type of presence on the Web--whether hosting their own Web site or participating in a host's Web site--the Department wishes to make clear the limited scope of its regulations. For example, the Department is considering proposing explicit regulatory language that makes clear that Web content created or posted by Web site users for personal, noncommercial use is not covered, even if that content is posted on the Web site of a public accommodation or a public entity."
Incidentally, the site doesn't give you the link to the docket for the proposed rule [regulations.gov].
Re:So now the web will go back to looking like 199 (Score:3, Informative)
When I worked in construction in L.A. . . .
There's your problem right there. California, and LA in particular, have some of the strictest, most arbitrary, most "can't fight city hall", building codes in the nation. One time, when we were following a client's standard design of having a thru-the-wall A/C unit to cool the little server room within an unconditioned stock room / warehouse, LA inspector's insisted we build a permanent ladder and a platform around it for servicing, citing a section of the code obviously intended to prevent homeowners from falling through the ceiling when furnaces and A/C units get installed in unfinished attics.