E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 4 (In chronological order)

From: John Foliot - Stanford Online Accessibility Program
Date: Wed, Aug 22 2007 12:20PM
Subject: Accessible CMS (was RE: form label question)
No previous message | Next message →

Sawang Srisom wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Does anyone here happen to know any accessible content management
> system (CMS)? I've been searching for it for weeks but cannot really
> find a good one.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Sawang Srisom


Having dealt with this at different levels, I might suggest the following:

Quick 'n Easy CMS:
[http://www.qnecms.co.uk/] a light-weight but extremely accessible CMS.
Ideal for smaller one or two content author type sites.

Drupal v. 5.x:
[http://WWW.drupal.org] A serious "swiss army knife" CMS that *can* be
accessible: the current default template is pretty good out of the box,
although the myriad plug-in modules vary in quality. However, the core
package is quite good and worth looking at - I am seeing it being deployed
quite extensively here on campus, and with some minor tweaks to the
templates and CSS I'm generally satisfied that we're "getting there" - not
perfect, but not bad...

Joomla!
[http://www.joomla.org/] While I've not actually worked with this CMS, I did
have the opportunity to speak with the core developer group last March, and
I left that discussion with the feeling that accessibility is a key aspect
of their CMS as well. Worthwhile investigating.

Hope this helps

JF

From: Harrington, Karen
Date: Wed, Nov 21 2007 10:30AM
Subject: question
← Previous message | Next message →

Here's a scenario that I need help with:

A company supplies on-line tutoring services. A user must have the
ability to type in their question and read the tutor's responses. If a
user cannot do this (for whatever reason), they may call a toll-free
number in order to communicate with a tutor.

The company wants users with accessibility needs to be aware of the
toll-free number; however, they do not want the number mis-used. The
system could ask a user when registering to indicate that they have
accessibility needs. If so, then the toll-free number would be supplied
to them only.

Is it against 508 or other federal policy to store accessibility needs
on a user?

From: Karl Groves
Date: Wed, Nov 21 2007 10:40AM
Subject: Re: question
← Previous message | Next message →

OMB once published a notice essentially banning cookies on government sites:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/m00-13.html

I am unaware, however, whether this has been rescinded. As you can see, it
is dated 2000.

There is a few more materials on privacy & cookies located at
http://www.usa.gov/webcontent/reqs_bestpractices/laws_regs/privacy.shtml
which also contains a 2002 OMB document, but I'm unfamiliar with its
contents. It may also answer your question.

Karl Groves
AIM/YIM: karlcore
Skype: eight.pistons
www.WebAccessStrategies.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto:webaim-forum-
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Harrington, Karen
> Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 12:29 PM
> To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> Subject: [WebAIM] question
>
>
>
> Here's a scenario that I need help with:
>
> A company supplies on-line tutoring services. A user must have the
> ability to type in their question and read the tutor's responses. If a
> user cannot do this (for whatever reason), they may call a toll-free
> number in order to communicate with a tutor.
>
> The company wants users with accessibility needs to be aware of the
> toll-free number; however, they do not want the number mis-used. The
> system could ask a user when registering to indicate that they have
> accessibility needs. If so, then the toll-free number would be supplied
> to them only.
>
> Is it against 508 or other federal policy to store accessibility needs
> on a user?
>

From: Darian Glover
Date: Fri, Nov 23 2007 9:20AM
Subject: Re: question
← Previous message | No next message

I've worked within the U.S. federal government on web projects for
over five years here in Washington, DC. The policy on cookies is one
of the most misunderstood issues I have encounterd. Mostly this is
due to a lack of understanding and an obsession people have with
"cookies." There has been so much confusion that a clarification memo
was issued.

There is *no* such ban on cookies. The web is a stateless environment
and without cookies it would be next to impossible to conduct any type
of business process or transaction.

1. Note the cited memorandum,
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/m00-13.html, is titled Privacy
Policies and Data Collection on Federal Web Sites. ** This is privacy
issue, not a technical issue. **

2. Federal agencies are required to establish privacy policies and to
publish these policies for and on their web sites. It is strongly
recommended (if not required in some areas) to follow P3P, the
Platform for Privacy Preferences. http://www.w3.org/P3P/

3. When cookies are used on federal government web sites the requirements are:
A. Clear and conspicuous notice that cookies are used. (Terms and conditions)
B. There is a compelling need to gather the data on the site. (Business need)
C. Appropriate and publicly disclosed privacy safeguards for
handling of information (The public sector equivalent of "we will not
sell/trade/share your information")
D. Personal approval by the head of the agency (This is often
delegated down and interpreted as appropriate management approval.)

This policy only applies to U.S. federal government web sites.

On the original issue of asking for and storing information on a
visitor's accessibility needs; this type of information could be
considered medical information. I hate to add such a complication. I
suggest you research health privacy issues, if not speak to your
organization's lawyers to see if your current policies and processes
are sufficient to meet privacy concerns.

I think the use is a good idea. On some projects I have worked on we
have discussed adding to the user's profile a "Provide enhancements to
the user interface for accessibility." This would avoid most of the
medical information management issues.


Darian.


On Nov 21, 2007 12:39 PM, Karl Groves < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>
> OMB once published a notice essentially banning cookies on government sites:
> http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/m00-13.html
>
> I am unaware, however, whether this has been rescinded. As you can see, it
> is dated 2000.
>
> There is a few more materials on privacy & cookies located at
> http://www.usa.gov/webcontent/reqs_bestpractices/laws_regs/privacy.shtml
> which also contains a 2002 OMB document, but I'm unfamiliar with its
> contents. It may also answer your question.
>
> Karl Groves
> AIM/YIM: karlcore
> Skype: eight.pistons
> www.WebAccessStrategies.com
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto:webaim-forum-
> > = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Harrington, Karen
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 12:29 PM
> > To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > Subject: [WebAIM] question
> >
> >
> >
> > Here's a scenario that I need help with:
> >
> > A company supplies on-line tutoring services. A user must have the
> > ability to type in their question and read the tutor's responses. If a
> > user cannot do this (for whatever reason), they may call a toll-free
> > number in order to communicate with a tutor.
> >
> > The company wants users with accessibility needs to be aware of the
> > toll-free number; however, they do not want the number mis-used. The
> > system could ask a user when registering to indicate that they have
> > accessibility needs. If so, then the toll-free number would be supplied
> > to them only.
> >
> > Is it against 508 or other federal policy to store accessibility needs
> > on a user?
> >