Web Site Accessibility Blog

Hello, Accessibility Blog readers! Matt has invited me to contribute to his Accessibility Blog, and today seems to be an appropriate occasion to introduce myself. I’m an accessible web designer based in Saint Paul, Minnesota. Although I do keep my own blog, Accessible Design, the opportunity to work with Matt and contribute here is a great opportunity for me.

You might have noticed a small change to this site over the last few hours. Well, the site’s had a bit of a facelift. But it’s more than just a facelift: I’m actually combing over the code with an eye to making this site as web accessible as we can. Some concessions have been made, but I hope they’re forgivable. Some mistakes have probably also been made - hopefully you’ll not only forgive those, but tell me about them and give me the chance to fix them!

Here are some of the changes I’ve made to aid accessibility:

1. Skip Links

   The site now offers keyboard-accessible “Skip Links”, providing quick access to the content, sidebar, footer, and to the site’s accessibility statement.

2. Script dependencies eliminated

   Certain features of this site used to depend on JavaScript - namely, the “email this post” functionality and the “print this post” functionality. These features have been kept, but the JavaScript aspects have been eliminated.

3. Increased default font

   The site has always had a flexible font size: but now the default is noticeably larger than it once was.

4. Valid XHTML

   The template, at least, now provides valid XHTML 1.0. Although, for now, this is no real promise for each and every page and post; it’s an important first step. Over the next few days, I will be going through the site and clearing up validation errors which are embedded in the site.

5. Zoom Layout

   This was one of the more difficult decisions. This zoom layout, which is entirely built using ems for a text-size proportional layout, has a width of 60 ems. This width, at the default text width, is wider than an 800 pixel screen resolution. We agreed that this was an acceptable choice because the blog is principally targeted at a highly technical market. Statistics show that less than 1 percent of Accessibility Blog’s visitors are using a screen resolution of 800×600.

   Nonetheless, if our decision causes any of you problems, we do want to hear about it.

Simplicity was a critical factor in this redesign: Matt didn’t want anything complex. Hopefully, this redesign is sufficient to satisfy all visitors!

Joe Clark thinks that Target may win. Apparently, they’ve dug up some JAWS power users that can get through the site with minimal difficulty. That’s a big blow to the claim that it is inaccessible.

Rob Garner asks why Target would resist the very improvements that would make the site more usable and relevant in the search engines.

The Target v NFB Case History, as well as excellent legal resources for disability rights: The dismissal ruling.

Of course, The case has made it to the Wikipedia. Feel free to contribute . . .
Jacob Sullum proposes that if Government mandates accessibility, then they should fund the necessary changes, otherwise it is the web development companies that benefit. The comments under his proposal tend to disagree, as accessibility practices can be enacted more easily than most people think. One commenter asks if sentences will have to be shorter as the current generation of ADD kids grow up and use websites.

In what is being called a landmark precedent for accessibility, Federal District Court Judge Marilyn Hall Patel ruled today that a retailer may be sued if its website is inaccessible to the blind. Target had filed for a dismissal by arguing that no law requires them to make an accessible website. The Court denied this motion and held that both federal and state civil laws apply to a website.

Some legal “mumbo-jumbo” for the wanna-be lawyers:

“The court held: “the ‘ordinary meaning’ of the ADA’s prohibition against discrimination in the enjoyment of goods, services, facilities or privileges, is that whatever goods or services the place provides, it cannot discriminate on the basis of disability in providing enjoyment of those goods and services.” The court thus rejected Target’s argument that only its physical store locations were covered by the civil rights laws, ruling instead that all services provided by Target, including its Web site, must be accessible to persons with disabilities.”

Basically, Target tried to argue that accessibility only applied to the physical locations and not the website. The court disagreed saying that all services must be accessible to “persons with disabilities.”

While this is only a ruling on a plea for dismissal, and not the actual case decision, it is interesting to note that this court is NOT making a distinction between a physical store and its website. This is critical to the case that the National Federation of the Blind is making.

Today’s ruling is based more on California’s civil laws than the Federal accessibility laws, as Target specifically challenged the interpretation of civil rights laws in application to the Internet. Again, I see this as more of an interesting interpretation than a “landmark”. It’s more like legal wrangling of the terms and specific laws, codes, and issues involved, which is typical.

The last thing I think we need is a bunch of lawsuits on the heels of this one – just because we can. I tend to side with the free enterprise system where the consumer votes with his money. If web retailers are willing to ignore a large segment of the population, then they will pay the price in lost sales. It is my hope that someone will be creative enough to build something better, rather suing companies to make them change. Invention is much better than coercion.

In the inspirational story of the day category, I found this in my newswire reading – the Third annual Accessibility Internet Rally for Houston.

The Houston area is having a one-day event to match designers and developers with non-profit organizations to create media-rich, interactive and accessible websites. Both the developers and the non-profits learn more about accessibility, but also give non-profit organizations the opportunity to have access to professional designers, and understand government accessibility mandates.

The web professionals will be taught the accessibility techniques, W3C and 508 standards, take classes in CSS, JavaScript and multimedia. The non-profits will also receive a year of free hosting. In the past, sites that have been made accessible include Taping for the Blind, Texas Paralyzed Veterans Association, Girl Scouts of San Jacinto Council, and the University of Houston Center for Student with Disabilities.

The organization behind this initiative is a company called Knowbility. Knowbility is a non-profit organization that was founded to help ensure that children and adults with disabilities.

This is one of the greatest things I have read since I have been working in accessibility. This is truly a community that is coming together to help those in need and learn more about the world outside themselves. Simply bringing together non-profits and designers is cool enough, but to offer educational classes and business benefits to both – that’s amazing.

I am always amazed when someone comes up with an idea that isn’t meant to be profitable, but beneficial. However, in the end – everyone profits from it.