WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Conforming alternate version

for

From: L Snider
Date: Jan 14, 2022 8:31AM

Hi Zsolt,

For me, I would talk with the client and find out why they want to do a
seperate site-what is the motivation. Then I would talk to them about why I
feel this is a very flawed strategy. If they wouldn't budge, then I
wouldn't be the right person for this client...if the only option they see
is alternate, then I can't make change. That is just me, others will have
different views. One can argue well at least there is an accessible
version-but for me that isn't equality or inclusion and it still makes
people with disabilities 'other' (others may see it that way, I don't).

Cheers

Lisa

On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 6:52 AM Zsolt Edelényi < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:

> Thank you,
>
> I understand, that this is not a good strategy, but this is acceptable
> at all? Basically, the site is not usable for the users not using or
> not perceiving the accessible version.
>
> Zsolt
>
> 2022. 01. 13. 15:04 keltezéssel, L Snider írta:
> > Hi Zsolt,
> >
> > I also had a flashback to 2003 with the alternate accessible site. I
> would
> > highly recommend not doing this for a number of reasons. We should be
> able
> > to make one site fairly accessible for many people. We can never make one
> > site accessible for 100% of users, because each one of us has different
> > needs. Technology changes every year, and sometimes in months-Look at
> voice
> > control, and how it has improved hugely in just 4 years and now it is a
> > major tech to check with...
> >
> > Having two sites 'others' those of us with disabilities, and in 2022 this
> > would not be a strategy I recommend. For me, this is similar to overlays,
> > and I won't get into that rat's nest but if you aren't aware of that, do
> go
> > on Twitter and search overlays accessibility.
> >
> > Plus, in my personal view, it opens you up to a lawsuit. It may not apply
> > to the country you reside in, but it is an important successful lawsuit
> in
> > my view:
> >
> https://www.levelaccess.com/settlement-shows-limits-separate-equal-approach-digital-accessibility/
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > L:sa
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 4:57 AM Zsolt Edelényi < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> >
> >> Thank you Mark and Glen for your answer!
> >>
> >> Zsolt
> >>
> >> 2022. 01. 12. 16:44 keltezéssel, glen walker írta:
> >>> The "Conforming Alternate Version" is spelled out pretty well at the
> link
> >>> you mentioned:
> >>>
> >>> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#dfn-conforming-alternate-version
> >>>
> >>> In this case, it looks like non-conforming version (the main website?)
> >> has
> >>> a link to the conforming version via the image link (the first link on
> >> the
> >>> page) that looks like a yellow circle with three embedded black
> circles.
> >>> The image has appropriate alt text leading the user to the "barrier
> free"
> >>> version.
> >>>
> >>> However, both the link and the image are tab stops. The link does not
> >> have
> >>> a focus indicator but the image does, so technically the link would
> fail
> >>> the "accessibility-supported mechanism" requirement in #4.1 because it
> >>> doesn't have a focus indicator. But that's easy to fix. There's no
> need
> >>> to have tabindex=0 on the image since it's contained in the link and if
> >> the
> >>> focus indicator is fixed, it would satisfy a "conforming alternate
> >> version"
> >>> (assuming the website it's linked to is actually conforming and
> provides
> >>> all the same information as the original site and is kept up to date).
> >>>
> >>> Personally, I think it's a lot more work to maintain two websites and
> >> make
> >>> sure they stay in sync when changes are made rather than the work
> >> required
> >>> to make the original website conformant.
> >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> --
> >> Zsolt Edelényi
> >> Web Accessibility Specialist
> >> Mobile: +36205617144
> >> email: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> >>
> >> > >> > >> > >> > >>
> > > > > > > > >
> --
> Zsolt Edelényi
> Web Accessibility Specialist
> Mobile: +36205617144
> email: <EMAIL REMOVED>
>
> > > > >