WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Universities Legal Web Accessibility Update

for

From: Jason Taylor-UsableNet
Date: Dec 9, 2003 11:17AM

Hello Kevin

I feel you are making me post the same reply a third time (once me and once
Giorgio) so I apologize if this is repeating previous postings but again you
say we need a "re-wording of the marketing materials and overall effort".

We view the recent postings only as good community feedback and I have not
or would not describe that we feel you are making us out to be evil (not
sure where that came from). I again point to the posting at
http://www.usablenet.com/accessibility_usability/textonly.html
Entitled: Text-only mode as part of website accessibility and usability

This was as a direct response to some of these postings and clearly outlines
how we see a text-mode or providing and controlling a text alternative
interface can benefit an overall accessibility strategy.

I agree that the majority of the postings where in response to marketing
wording and not product function and I agree that it fell on the wrong side
of the tracks - for that we are sorry.

On the last posting with regard communication on section 508 - it was purely
sharing with the community some clarification on one of the points
discussed.

We have created a suite of products that are presented as a complete
solution to create accessible and usable content; from finding issues,
fixing issues and then providing the flexible display options. This is our
product position.

Regards
Jason Taylor




> Jason,
>
> Thanx for the due diligence, and checking in w/ Ken. There's only one
> problem with this... Considering the fact that most universities, and state
> govt's are codifying practices that mimic if not directly adhere to the
> Section 508 guidelines, the question is moot. Similarly, the main point that
> most commentors have made to you and Giorgio is this...
>
> Universities, and other entities could mistakenly view the use of your new
> Transcoder, and the provision of equivalent text only pages as being
> sufficient to meet compliance. Hence my initial comments to you suggesting a
> re-wording of the marketing materials and overall effort. It really is that
> simple. Unfortunately, in the effort to defend the companies efforts, the
> main complaints and problems aren't being addressed.
>
> No one said the tool or by extension the company was evil... We're just
> worried that it will be misused/misapplied and therefore do more damage than
> good.
>
> HK
>
>