Thread Subject: Re: Summary of proposed newWeband Softwareprovisions
This archival content is maintained by WebAIM and NCDAE on behalf of TEITAC and the U.S. Access Board . Additional details on the updates to section 508 and section 255 can be found at the Access Board web site.
As long as there is something in the web site section that makes it
clear that an equivalent format is required, then saying text-only page,
isn't necessary. I agree with Andi, and alternative format that is
equivalent, may not be a text-only version.
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Andi
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2007 5:21 PM
To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] Summary of proposed new Weband
Looks like we have two opposing views on 22 (k).
A text-only page, with equivalent information or functionality, shall be
provided to make a web site comply with the provisions of this part,
when compliance cannot be accomplished in any other way. The content of
the text-only page shall be updated whenever the primary page changes.
Barbara thinks it is important and SHOULD NOT be removed. David thinks
it doesn't help accessibility and SHOULD be removed.
When we discussed this provision, we determined that it was not
necessary because of the over arching principle of equivalent
Alternative versions are already allowed by the equivalent facilitation
principle whether this provision is in the Web section or not. It is
also too restrictive in requiring a "text-only" page. The alternative
version doesn't have to be "text only". It just has to conform.
Regarding "text only" web pages as alternatives, I'd recommend inserting
language recommending using this as a last resort. Moreover, if a "text
only" page is utilized, it should pull information from the same source
as the "non text only" page.
Manager: Assistive Technology Group
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Information Technology Division
One Ashburton Place
Boston, MA 02108