RE: FN-FORUM: Websites for the disabled

date posted 8th January 2008 14:09


>Sorry I can't see what point you are making for all the sarcasm. Are you
saying that you believe that if a service >provider has 3 mechanisms for
accessing his service then all 3 of them must be accessible to disabled
people? If so, it >is you who is wrong; the act states only one must be
accessible.

Dear Gary, What i am saying is its a very ignorant stance to recommend to
others thats its possible to pick and choose compliance to discrimination /
accessibility laws on the justification of whether an alternative or
supportive service agrees with legislation.

NO! Your local butcher cannot ignore accessibility guidlines for his shop
purely because he offers a mail-order service. He can however rightly say
that the laws of accessibility to a physical premises only require ramps etc
to be installed when a property was built or implemented a change of purpose
since the date the law was introduced.

Likwise it is wrong to inform people that they can choose not to adhere to
accessibility guidlines for websites purely because the 'disabled' person
can choose to use another means. That is not the point, and thus is half the
accessibility issue. If a disabled person wants to order his bread online
from a given company, that allows its non-disabled clients to buy the same
loaf of bread, then he/she must be able to do so. If this is not the case
the said shop is in fact breach of such accessibility legislation, unless
they have made every 'reasonable' effort to minimise the problem between the
two user groups.

Of course the major issue here is the exact definition of 'reasonable',
where reasonable for one company is completely different to another. Thus
effectively the law IS that you MUST make an effort to try and make your
site accessible, and that you can NOT pick and choose how and where you
apply the rules.