WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Lift Assistive

for

From: Sean Murphy
Date: Feb 11, 2016 11:57PM

Text only is old school thinking and is really only focusing at a sub-section of the disability community. I suspect it was more geared towards screen reader users. Any site that has dedicated pages for accessibility isn't following best practises and costing themselves more money.

Sean
> On 12 Feb 2016, at 1:25 pm, Maxability Accessibility for all < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
> <its tools like this i think make our job harder. we keep telling people we
> need to code to standereds and then some one comes in and says our tool
> will do what you need make an accessable vertion well i say stop now and
> just code to the standers you will get better web sites and more access for
> every one not only people with disabilitys.>
>
> I second this. Just code to the standards.
>
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 1:38 AM, Don Mauck < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
>> Couldn't agree more! We had older architecture that required
>> Accessibility settings. Our position now is that we expect products to
>> stop using that and code to the standards. If we do that, shouldn't need
>> any special settings, customers hate it.
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Lucy Greco [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ]
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2016 12:42 PM
>> To: WebAIM Discussion List
>> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Lift Assistive
>>
>> its tools like this i think make our job harder. we keep telling people we
>> need to code to standereds and then some one comes in and says our tool
>> will do what you need make an accessable vertion well i say stop now and
>> just code to the standers you will get better web sites and more access for
>> every one not only people with disabilitys.
>>
>> Lucia Greco
>> Web Accessibility Evangelist
>> IST - Architecture, Platforms, and Integration
>> University of California, Berkeley
>> (510) 289-6008 skype: lucia1-greco
>> http://webaccess.berkeley.edu
>> Follow me on twitter @accessaces
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 11:16 AM, Moore,Michael (Accessibility) (HHSC) <
>> <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>>
>>> If you have actually achieved WCAG AA compliance then I do not see a
>>> reason to continue to keep your Lift license, unless your web office is
>> way
>>> overfunded and you just cannot figure out what to do with all of the
>> money.
>>>
>>> Seriously though, I think of these kinds of tools as a way to provide
>>> limited access while work is done to make everything work as it should.
>>> Once the work is done they should be retired.
>>>
>>> Mike Moore
>>> Accessibility Coordinator
>>> Texas Health and Human Services Commission
>>> Civil Rights Office
>>> (512) 438-3431 (Office)
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On
>>> Behalf Of Thompson, Rachel
>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2016 11:59 AM
>>> To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
>>> Subject: [WebAIM] Lift Assistive
>>>
>>> Hi, esteemed list.
>>>
>>> One of the web decision makers on our campus is asking for opinions on
>> the
>>> Lift Assistive tool. It has been in use on our campus for a long time as
>> a
>>> way to produce a text-only version of web pages.
>>>
>>> I know text-only does not mean accessible and I think tools like this
>> give
>>> our web teams the erroneous feeling that content is accessible when it is
>>> not. I also hate the lack of equity with separate-but-equal approaches.
>>>
>>> If our web resources are created to meet WCAG 2.0 AA (our goal), is there
>>> a reason to keep our Lift Assistive license?
>>>
>>> If you have an opinion or have faced similar questions, could you please
>>> share?
>>>
>>> Much obliged,
>>> Rachel
>>>
>>> Dr. Rachel S. Thompson
>>> Director, Emerging Technology and Accessibility Center for Instructional
>>> Technology University of Alabama
>>> >>> >>> at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> > > >