Re: [WSG] eCensus Web Site Accessibility
Terrence Wood wrote: Do you have any ideas on how to force government entities to comply? Personal accountability for stakeholders perhaps? I think their advisors/suppliers (e-i-new media ltd and their ilk) should be held accountable as well - and that's easy to do, make it a term of the contract for services. Sometimes this doesn't exactly come off as planned.. As the advisors/suppliers claim one thing prior to sale to the client and don't include it inside the contractual obligations for delivery (the usual 'variations' in contract clauses). Once the project has been delivered and monies invested, they are beyond the point of no return, which leaves web standards / accessibilities experts retrofitting supplied infrastructure. Is this retrofitting a good thing or a bad thing ? :-S -- Lawrence Meckan Absalom Media Mob: (04) 1047 9633 ABN: 49 286 495 792 http://www.absalom.biz ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] eCensus Web Site Accessibility
Thanks Terrence, I tried to force change. I made a formal complaint under the Aust 1992 Dis Dis Act stating that I had trouble using a mouse and wanted keyboard access. The bloody dramas that caused! I complained about the Centrelink site, but AGIMO stated that their site was near enough. The Chief Information Officer at AGIMO last worked at Centrelink. I got nowhere and in the end withdrew the complaint or it was going to be struck out by Human Rights who accepted advice from the Aust government department AGIMO that another government department Centrelink was W3C close enough and would be updated anway, so go away. If I were blind, I would have had a better cause for keyboard access. I could not get any support from any organisations and Vision Australia stated to me in a job interview that they preferred to work with their clients, not beat them over the head. I prefer the beat them over the head approach having seen the alternative fail so badly, but I have run out of sticks, I update a review of Aust government websites occasionally and try to embarrass them into action. I think they hope none notices except a few of us, certainly there is no organisational support for an action like Maguire v Sydney Olympics, it will take one determined individual to try and force change. I'm fresh out of sticks and sick of flogging a dead horse. http://www.hereticpress.com/Dogstar/Publishing/AustWeb.html Tim Melbourne On 30/07/2006, at 11:06 PM, Mark Harris wrote: Terrence Wood wrote: WAI level A is great because you can get there by accident (which makes me wonder why so many people just can't do it), but I really think e-gov needs to be achieving level 2 compliance. Oh, I agree completely - I was just trying to set the bar low enough that at least some would pass ;-) Do you have any ideas on how to force government entities to comply? Personal accountability for stakeholders perhaps? Apart from holding a gun to their heads? [sigh] I spent most of the 5 years from 2000 to 2005 trying to find ways to encourage NZ govt agencies to do this. I got more traction with commercial web developers than government agencies, sadly. Which is not to say there aren't plenty of web people in the NZG who believe in accessibility and the Guildelines, because there are. But not their managers or senior managers, it appears. I think we've got to go through the political reps and hold them accountable, to get them to put pressure on their portfolio agencies, but there always seems to be something with more priority. I think their advisors/suppliers (e-i-new media ltd and their ilk) should be held accountable as well - and that's easy to do, make it a term of the contract for services. Yep, and many NZ govt agencies do put that in the contracts (which was one of the things we promoted in the Guidelines) but keeping the site compliant once it's built is a different matter. Cheers Mark Harris ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** The Editor Heretic Press http://www.hereticpress.com Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] eCensus Web Site Accessibility
Tim wrote: Thanks Terrence, I tried to force change. I made a formal complaint under the Aust 1992 Dis Dis Act stating that I had trouble using a mouse and wanted keyboard access. The bloody dramas that caused! I complained about the Centrelink site, but AGIMO stated that their site was near enough. The Chief Information Officer at AGIMO last worked at Centrelink. I got nowhere and in the end withdrew the complaint or it was going to be struck out by Human Rights who accepted advice from the Aust government department AGIMO that another government department Centrelink was W3C close enough and would be updated anway, so go away. If I were blind, I would have had a better cause for keyboard access. I could not get any support from any organisations and Vision Australia stated to me in a job interview that they preferred to work with their clients, not beat them over the head. I prefer the beat them over the head approach having seen the alternative fail so badly, but I have run out of sticks, I update a review of Aust government websites occasionally and try to embarrass them into action. I think they hope none notices except a few of us, certainly there is no organisational support for an action like Maguire v Sydney Olympics, it will take one determined individual to try and force change. I'm fresh out of sticks and sick of flogging a dead horse. http://www.hereticpress.com/Dogstar/Publishing/AustWeb.html Tim, Are you sure you are approaching it in the right direction ? Now most, if not all the sites you list, would involve some form of CMS merely because of economies of scale involved. So who therefore is at fault? Is it: a) the organisations themselves who may get bad advice b) the advisors who give them that advice in regards to CMS infrastructure c) any or all in-house web staff, who may or may not be attempting to retrofit that CMS to do the job that is required by those organisations ? d) the solution providers who pitch the CMS as part of the sale, and then offer next to no warranty or support in regards to web standards ? e) some or all of the above, and if so, why? f) something/someone else? Other fits here Retrofitting is a bad methodology to work with, especially when you're dealing with version control inside a CMS, but in some ways that's most of the coalface stuff that I've seen from my area of the industry (CMS management). Forced change, by nature, will be opposed. People first have to see the value of an idea to increase the nature by which they will adopt that change. -- Lawrence Meckan Absalom Media Mob: (04) 1047 9633 ABN: 49 286 495 792 http://www.absalom.biz ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] eCensus Web Site Accessibility
On 29/07/2006, at 4:27 PM, Tim wrote: They would have a stronger voice if they stop whispering. I would like to hear that voice a little louder in Australia. Tim wrote lots, actually. My two cents for four riffs: 1) Employers who interview you, and don't thank you for your time, and/or don't let you know that they are no longer considering you are rude. Period. 2) High profile awards given to crappy sites are even more annoying, it stymies the industry, and ultimately everyone looses. And I still haven't worked out how a company can win the same award for the same site in consecutive years - cheapens the award. 3) Organisations who are advocates for groups within society really should advocate - especiallly in AU for web accessibility where they have precedence with Maguire v. Olympics. 4) Don't blame AGIMO. Governments are often advised by companies whose names start with i ,e or contain the words new media, and that's where the real problem is. kind regards Terrence Wood. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] eCensus Web Site Accessibility
-Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Sent: Saturday, 29 July 2006 11:41 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] eCensus Web Site Accessibility Who is really pushing the case for accessibile website standards in Australia, a few individuals only I believe. Does Vision Australia send out non-compliance notices to companies with bad websites like RNIB do in the UK. Has Vision Australia taken any action under the DDA 1992 like Americans have against Target? I am tired of low standards in the Australian government websites and organisations who do nothing effective to force change. Vision Australia demand nothing from the government and they get nothing in return. They like to work with their clients while creating a false impression internationally that the Australian government is hanging on their every word. The Australian government could not care less what Vision Australia does, yet Vision Australia does nothing but let the status quo continue. I don't see why it should be Vision Australia's job to send out non-compliance notices to companies with bad websites. Of course accessible website would be of interest to Vision Australia, but they are not the one and only organisation with members or clients affected by bad accessibility. You might as well demand the same from Scope, Australian Hearing and the Physical Disability Council of Australia. It should be the government's job to ensure accessibility is being provided as much as can reasonably be expected. I agree that it is a waste of time and money for eCensus to make two forms (one accessible, one inaccessible), but at least they try. It's a start, isn't it? ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] eCensus Web Site Accessibility
-Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Sent: Saturday, 29 July 2006 11:41 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] eCensus Web Site Accessibility Who is really pushing the case for accessibile website standards in Australia, a few individuals only I believe. Does Vision Australia send out non-compliance notices to companies with bad websites like RNIB do in the UK. Has Vision Australia taken any action under the DDA 1992 like Americans have against Target? I am tired of low standards in the Australian government websites and organisations who do nothing effective to force change. Vision Australia demand nothing from the government and they get nothing in return. They like to work with their clients while creating a false impression internationally that the Australian government is hanging on their every word. The Australian government could not care less what Vision Australia does, yet Vision Australia does nothing but let the status quo continue. I don't see why it should be Vision Australia's job to send out non-compliance notices to companies with bad websites. Of course accessible website would be of interest to Vision Australia, but they are not the one and only organisation with members or clients affected by bad accessibility. You might as well demand the same from Scope, Australian Hearing and the Physical Disability Council of Australia. It should be the government's job to ensure accessibility is being provided as much as can reasonably be expected. I agree that it is a waste of time and money for eCensus to make two forms (one accessible, one inaccessible), but at least they try. It's a start, isn't it? -Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Sent: Saturday, 29 July 2006 1:05 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] eCensus Web Site Accessibility I believe that UK sites are better than Australian sites in part because RNIB are a more proactive organisation, testing sites for standards compliance, awarding See it Right certification and sending notices of non-compliance to companies with inaccessible websites. Low advocacy levels produces low standards compliance. If Vision Australia do not push hard for standards compliance why should AGIMO care what a few individuals like me say? Firstly, I would like to differentiate between standards compliance and accessibility. Standards Compliance does not equal accessibility and accessibility does not equal standards compliance. A website can be not complying with standards and still be accessible by the majority of people. And just because a website complies with standards certainly does not mean it's accessible. The reason I would like to make this difference is because I certainly agree with you that if a government website is obviously inaccessible and it could be expected to be improved, organisations such as Vision Australia and other associations that represent users with disabilities should voice their concerns and attempt to force a change. However, I do not believe that it is the job of any of those organisations to go and test websites for standards compliance and send out notices or award some kind of certificates. They certainly have got better things to do than that. Do you know how many websites they would have to go and test? And what if those websites are standards compliant - does it mean they are therefore accessible or user-friendly for visually disabled users? Not really. I would suggest that it is the role of the individual to find problematic websites and report them. However, the reporting process could go perhaps through the channels of organisations such as Vision Australia or RNIB, as they have got a stronger voice. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
