E-mail List Archives
Re: Accessible Applications
From: Darian Glover
Date: May 13, 2008 8:30AM
- Next message: Kara Zirkle: "Re: Accessible Applications"
- Previous message: Karl Groves: "Re: Accessible Applications"
- Next message in Thread: Kara Zirkle: "Re: Accessible Applications"
- Previous message in Thread: Karl Groves: "Re: Accessible Applications"
- View all messages in this Thread
Karl,
I cannot cite every Department's and Agency's procurement rules within the
Federal Government, mostly because government procurement is such a mess.
Here is one Department that does require VPATs:
http://www.state.gov/m/irm/impact/52675.htm
Darian.
On 5/12/08, Karl Groves < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
> That's quite a list you have, Kara.
> One step that may help you in finding what you seek is to look for a VPAT
> for these products. Contrary to Darian's response, VPATs are not
> mandatory
> (what is mandatory is that the FAR Part 10 requires market research, for
> which VPATs help.).
>
> The other thing about VPATs is that, in my experience, they're often
> inaccurate. I don't want to say that vendors lie on their VPATs (though
> they could) but that sometimes it seems like the person filling them out
> doesn't seem to understand 508 or that the version of the application
> currently in release is not the same as the version discussed in the VPAT.
> There seems to be a lot of reasons why a VPAT could be inaccurate. The
> bottom line is, be skeptical. In cases where a VPAT was supplied by a 3rd
> party, accuracy seems to increase (because those 3rd parties don't want to
> be grilled about inaccuracies).
>
> A VPAT is NOT a legal document and does not, in and of itself, prevent or
> permit any acquisition.
>
> > Also, has anyone contacted vendors directly asking for changes to be
> > made in response to accessibility if contract language wasn't
> > originally
> > in the picture
>
> In practice: Your chances are relatively slim and directly proportional to
> your purchasing power. For example, let's say GMU is purchasing something
> from Microsoft. The chance of them remediating something for GMU is
> nonexistent compared to the chance they'd do it for a major government
> agency such as IRS or SSA and, unless it is in the original contract is
> already slim-to-none. A contract is a contract and must clearly define
> the
> work to be performed, including adherence to any standards for
> accessibility. It would be like trying to take a car back to the
> dealership because it came with the wrong engine when you didn't tell the
> dealer which engine you wanted in the first place. The best you can do is
> learn from mistakes and make sure they're not made again.
>
>
>
> Karl Groves
> AIM/YIM: karlcore
> Skype: eight.pistons
> www.WebAccessStrategies.com
>
>
> >
- Next message: Kara Zirkle: "Re: Accessible Applications"
- Previous message: Karl Groves: "Re: Accessible Applications"
- Next message in Thread: Kara Zirkle: "Re: Accessible Applications"
- Previous message in Thread: Karl Groves: "Re: Accessible Applications"
- View all messages in this Thread