Giving the Blind Better Web Access 168
crimeandpunishment writes "Decades ago, the breakthrough for the disabled was making buildings wheelchair accessible. Today, it's making their world Web-accessible. Disabled groups are hailing new legislation Congress has sent to the President. Among other things, the measure will give the blind greater Internet access through smart phones, and require devices like iPhones and Blackberrys to be hearing-aid compatible. 'It breaks down barriers for all of us,' says Mark Richert of the American Foundation for the Blind."
New blacktop for the road to hell (Score:5, Insightful)
These sorts of well-intentioned pieces of legislation are the kind of thing that ostensibly are for our betterment and they always look great on paper. But when you're actually have to design a website and you start running into the requirements of Section 508 [wikipedia.org] and other such well-meaning laws, the feel-good shine wears off fast. Inevitably they mean considerably more work in the best case scenario, and a "dumbing down" of a website in the worst case scenario (if you follow the "suggested" best-practices). You can look at the "cultural heritage" laws in Quebec as an example of where good intentions can go. It starts off with a noble goal of not excluding French-speakers from public life, and eventually leads to something like Bill 101 [wikipedia.org], which all but outlawed English in the region, complete with a language gestapo.
I'm all for the blind being able to use the web. But wouldn't it be much better to approach the issue as a technological one on the viewer's end, and not a legislative one on the designer's end? I would much rather be asked to do something that TOLD to do it, under threat of law.
Re:New blacktop for the road to hell (Score:5, Insightful)
This used to be a really evil thing, but now it's a blessing in disguise. The right way of making a web page (nice clean <p>s and unordered lists, alts on all the images, styled with CSS) is extremely accessible. The more people do that, the better!
Re:New blacktop for the road to hell (Score:2, Insightful)
D00d, if you have either technical or philosophical difficulties making or re-vamping websites to be standards compliant, please contact me via Cmdr Taco. I've got at least a dozen coders and designers with big hearts, open minds, and insane skills who are currently under-employed and would jump at the opportunity for the work.
Seriously.
Breaking down barriers? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:New blacktop for the road to hell (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm at a conference about accessibility right now and I was just looking at the giant display of the history of disability, so I'm getting a kick out of your post.
Seriously, without legislative mandates pushing this kind of thing, the disabled will just continue to be overlooked by the big vendors and ripped off by small vendors. We are doing things with iOS 4 and iPad for $4-600 that a year ago we had to spend $5000-7500 on.
With a law forcing this, the tech will get cheaper and better.
Re:New blacktop for the road to hell (Score:4, Insightful)
The technological problem on the viewer's end is largely solved, so long as existing web standards and best practices regarding separation of content and presentation are adhered to.
Aside from technology that essentially cures blindness, though, your never going to get a technological solution on the viewer's end that deals with the choice to use inaccessible presentation as the only way of getting at the content on the designer's end.
Re:New blacktop for the road to hell (Score:4, Insightful)
Exactly. The only people who are whining about stuff like this are the idiots making whole websites entirely in flash or who don't know how to follow best practices for web development. Making a website accessible to text readers, etc is extremely trivial if you follow web standards.
Re:More than just the blind... (Score:3, Insightful)
And those subtitles are not only useful for the HOH/deaf, they're useful for people trying to watch foreign language movies or just let us understand actors with a thick accent.
Re:New blacktop for the road to hell (Score:4, Insightful)
Agreed: Handicapped accessible == machine readable. For too long has the Web been dominated by marketing people who care everything about controlling the "visual experience" and just don't get the concept of separating layout from semantics. If you grok HTML and CSS then I fail to see how an accessible design costs a whole lot more than a non-accessible one. Well, aside from the fact that CMS designers don't seem to give a damn about accessibility or standards compliance either.
Disclaimer: this comes from a guy who works at a company whose idea of putting information on the Intranet is to post a link to a Word document. *facepalm*
Screw that, give them access... (Score:2, Insightful)
...by investing in tech and science that can make them see it with their EYES! [sciencenews.org]
While it is nice to see the gov't pass laws like this, it would be even nicer to see them put up the funding for developing the tech/science further behind studies like the one I linked to. Or lifting the ban on stem cell research so that we can really get on track with giving back the senses that have been robbed from so many people, among other things.
Re:Can't we just delay for a bit? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:New blacktop for the road to hell (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:New blacktop for the road to hell (Score:1, Insightful)
Seriously? You are comparing being gay in our society to being blind and coming to the conclusion that gays have it worse? Gays can alter their behavior and be fully accepted by society, that is they can be celibate and there is nothing to distinguish them from heterosexuals. There is no such option for the blind. Should they have to change their behavior to that degree? Probably not, but we all change some behaviors to conform to the norms of society - no wearing bikinis to work for most jobs, wearing a suit to meetings rather than something more comfortable, etc.
Sodomy laws have largely been struck down (or not enforced knowing that they will be). Gay marriage is not about human rights, it is about forcing the other 97% to accept the gay lifestyle. If it were about healthcare, custody, etc. we would see standardized legal documents prepared and freely released to cover most of these eventualities or more focus on civil unions and making marriage a subclass of civil unions. Don't ask, don't tell should be about how to have the most effective military we can. Sacrificing 3% of the recruitment pool probably hurts our skills less than having college campuses ban/protest military recruiters over this issue. I seem to recall surveys indicating that more than this 3% figure would resign if DADT is repealed, so it seems perfectly logical to leave it until repealing it does help our military (maybe when the number of potential recruits that object to it outnumber those who objected to gays?).
Re:I am all for just (Score:4, Insightful)
br> Yeah, blah blah, it's socialism and distorts the free market. Whatever.