On Feb 20, 2011, at 5:36 AM, FT2 <[email protected]> wrote: > Spreading free knowledge implies a good free knowledge infrastructure, > including reputable free knowledge tools. We don't need the US govt > to use > any given software, it pays to make it as widely usable and not block > ourselves from any major group who might want to try using Mediawiki. > > Not least 1/ the US govt is not the only such body (other groups > receiving > federal funds?) and 2/ we ourselves have a genuine interest in > ensuring we > think hard how those with disabilities experience Wikimedia in > everyday use, > when creating our platform.
+1 Free knowledge for everyone is a key part of our mission, and everyone certainly includes the blind and those with other disabilities. And wikipedia is something that supposedly "anyone can edit". Section 508, widely used beyond government, is a benchmark to allow us to assess how we do in this regard. Since the US gov already uses mediawiki, know we have some admins that use a screen reader, know mediawiki supports keyboard shortcuts, etc., then I think we do pretty well to meet 508 though an assessment might identify some additional bugs. I would totally support us doing a VPAT (its voluntary) assessment and have it available on mediawiki wiki. Katie (@aude) > FT2 > > > On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Ting Chen <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Since we are not funded by the government and we have no relation >> what >> so ever with the US government I don't see what VPAT has any >> relevance >> to us. If the US government think MediaWiki doesn't fulfill the >> condition, they had to use another wiki engine I am afraid. >> >> Greetings >> Ting >> > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
