gquaglia, Jeff, Ivor Biggun and others: Too many people think that the world wide web is just a magazine for computers. It is not, it’s much richer than newspapers and magazines. Do you know that there are web content accessibility guidelines since 1999? 7 years is a long time in real world, nothing to say in the Internet.

People who suffer disabilities have the same right as you to surf the net, to find information online, to buy products online, to do whatever they want to on the internet. Making a website accessible is much easier than you would think, the problem is web designers/developers don’t bother, it’s just lazyness.

You say it’s useless to make websites accessible, I have one question for you: Instead of being inaccessible for the blind or disabled, would you think the same if their homepage said “Access denied for women, non-caucasian, elderly people…”? Would you think the same?

Because they have a reputation for speeding. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/458257.stm

Your list seems to suggest blind people can’t use computers – which is quite incorrect. Assistive technologies are available to take text content from a web page and read it out loud – keyboards are a powerful and capable input device. I wouldn’t be surprised if blind people were using the World Wide Web well before you hopped on.

I don’t see the danger to society by allowing – or encouraging – blind people to use the web. Certainly seems like a safer and easier place to buy goods than trying to get to the shops and back. Why deny them that option?

We do live in the twenty first century, you know.

Jeff: “there are no laws that dictate accessibility for Web sites. Frankly, I don’t think there should be. It would be no different than forcing a magazine or newspaper publisher to print Braille editions.”

No surprise that you are utterly wrong. The web is not a limited medium like paper. Paper is a limited visual medium – the web isn’t limited to visual perception. A piece of text on a computer can be displayed on a screen, read out loud, or rendered on a refreshable braille display – seeable, hearable and touchable. Show me one print magazine or one print newspaper that has that flexibility and that power.

The web has accessibility built in as a feature. Its up to web developers and web designers to use the medium properly. It is a great pity that most web designers out there are still using 1997-based techniques, rather than modern 2005 techniques. Every year they fall further and further behind.

gquaglia: “My brail comment was ment to point out why a ATM for drive up use would need it. The blind don’t drive.”

I take it you’ve never seen a blind person using a drive-through ATM from the back seat of a taxi. Or even considered the possibility.

Awake: “I’m a pro-photographer and now I have to worry that I will be sued because my photos are not accessible to the blind.”

Aren’t you confident enough of your profession to explain that your medium is inherently a limited visual one? The web isn’t limited in that way – I know its difficult for visually-orientated people to understand this. To you, a website is a visual experience, to others its an aural experience, much like an audiobook or telephone conversation, but with hyperlinks.

Very good points and I agree fully. As I get a little older and now wear reading glasses, I too find many web pages very hard to read. I usually move on if I am able. I assume your eyes are worse then mine and the problem more acute.

In post #13, I accidentally spelled “drive through” as “drive TROUGH”. Considering the fees banks charge to access your own money, maybe that could be an appropriate moniker.

I agree that a lawsuit is an inappropriate way to deal with the problem. I am sure Target had no intention of disenfranchising potental consumers. Contacting Target and explaining the problem would have likely have resulted in Target changing their website to accomidate bland and low vision people.

In web design classes I almost always bring up the needs of blind and low vision people. Most web design classes teach how to make pages look cool without any thought to low vision and blind visitors.

The geowing use of Flash often makes pages totoally useless to blind and low vision users.

I am a consultant who works with many elderly people and I have found many websites that are very hard for anyone wihtout good vision to read.

Web designers need to consider this part of their audience when creating web pages and the people who pay to have web pages created for them need to realize that either they should forgo flash and hard to read designs and color combinations, or that they should create a paralel website for low vision and blind users.

Basicly, don’t use miniscule fonts, use high contrast between the text and backgroun colors and use Flash sparingly (not for menus if it can be avoided).

I haven’t read the Winnibago manual, however the incident you mention, about the cruise control, is a myth. It never happened. Check out snopes.com. Good story, but a myth.

Also there are ATMs all over, not just in drive-troughs Most of the ones I’ve seen have the braille embossed into the buttons, not stuck on. Because the same machines are used indoors as well as at drive-troughs, it would make sense to use the same buttons. Besides, what is to stop a sight handicapped person from walking up to the machine after the bank is closed. I’ve never seen any drive through that said “No Blind Pedestrians”. I realize I am being a little ridiculous with that point, but there is the possibility it might be used by someone not driving.

As for the idea that there are so many “frivolous” law suits out there is a bogus statement. Yes, some do happen, but they are almost always thrown out by the judge. It is extremely rare that frivolous suits go to trial. To initiate the suit, the Plaintiff must offer some kind of proof that the incident happened, the defendant is responsible, and that they were actually injured. If you can’t show those three things your suit is thrown out.

What the Manufactures Association, medical insurers, and others do is keep suggesting that these suits are frivolous when they don’t exist. They want to change the rules to make it harder to be compensated by someone else’s mistakes. They don’t want to make manufacturers be more responsible for their products, or bad physicians stopped from practicing. They just don’t want you to have a fair hearing in front of an independent tribunal.

Do you remember Regan’s famous example of the guy who put a step ladder in cow manure and when it tipped over he sued? Well, that was an invented story, it just never happened yet here the President repeated that story several times including on TV. It wasn’t the high rewards that drove up the medical malpractice insurance, it is the bad Doctors performing bad surgeries and medicine that injured people that drove up the insurance.

I take it that neither you nor anyone you know ever needs assistance. You see, it is all those little things that make life impossible for many handicapped. Be it something like ramps on street corners so wheel chairs AND baby strollers might navigate safely, allowing guide dogs into restaurants so blind people may live more independently, and visual signals so the deaf are in less danger.

I don’t know which laws require handicap access or accessibility . Good public relations should be a driving force behind making more places accessible. If there is a law that requires Target.com to be accessible to the handicap, then would behooves me why they wouldn’t follow it.

Now, honestly can you tell me about any lawsuit that was frivolous that went to a jury? If any lawsuit is frivolous, the judge has the power to not only dismiss it, but award all reasonable costs to the defendant. Most courtrooms are too busy so the judge will toss out frivolous suits. I would suggest you check out the Stella Awards before answering about a frivolous jury award. The truth about the Stella awards and other legal myths can be found at Snopes.com.

http://snopes.com/legal/lawsuits.asp

Have you HEARD any of the grammy winners from the past few years? It’s obvious that ALL of the judges are hearing impaired.

I’m not trying to be apathetic to blind people here, but there are certain physical constraints for certain activities, and you can’t accommodate everyone every time. We’ve been over this in the amusement industry, where the best you can do is make rides that can safely hold 99% of riders, but getting to 100% reduces safety or eliminates the product entirely.

Accessibility for the blind is such an easy thing to do with technology is such an easy thing to do compared to the things corporate IT groups take on. Yes, there will always be people who sue for getting their coffee to hot, but that’s really a different issue than laws that allow more folks to be independent and contributing members of society.

I have worked with a couple of the big litigators on this issue, and it’s no secret when they are filing papers, and against which companies. I just left a company that has been on the lawsuit radar for several years, and despite being told, “you are next”, have not done anything about ADA/508. I hope they get many, many days of bad press over this.