E-mail List Archives
Thread: Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a compliance.
Number of posts in this thread: 9 (In chronological order)
From: Birkir Rúnar Gunnarsson
Date: Tue, Feb 01 2011 9:09PM
Subject: Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a compliance.
No previous message | Next message →
Dear all.
I am hoping for a bit of a shortcut by posting this, rather than
leafing through the WCAG 2.0 standard, because I guess some of you may
have dealt with this situation before.
An Icelandic government web site has put captia on every single load
of the web site (the web site is that of the superior court and they
claim they are protecting the privacy of the individuals in the court
cases from internet searches).
Their captia is completely inaccessible, and nothing on the site can
be activated without having to fill in the captia first.
The government has committed itself (not legally, but in its official
information society policy document) to W3C A compliance .. which I
take to mean WCAG 2.0 Level I compliance, it is never explained
further.
Which part of the WCAG standard does inaccessible captia break?
Does anyone have experience in writing about this before (a letter of
complaint or legal statement of any kind)?
Anything of that nature you can share would be very helpful.
Thank you very much and have a great day y'all.
-B
From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Date: Wed, Feb 02 2011 1:18AM
Subject: Re: Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a compliance.
← Previous message | Next message →
Birkir Rúnar Gunnarsson wrote:
> Which part of the WCAG standard does inaccessible captia break?
http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#text-equiv
See also:
http://www.w3.org/TR/turingtest/
--
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
From: Andrew Kirkpatrick
Date: Wed, Feb 02 2011 6:09AM
Subject: Re: Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a compliance.
← Previous message | Next message →
Under 1.1.1 Non-text Content: All non-text content that is presented to the user has a text alternative that serves the equivalent purpose, except for the situations listed below. (Level A)
CAPTCHA: If the purpose of non-text content is to confirm that content is being accessed by a person rather than a computer, then text alternatives that identify and describe the purpose of the non-text content are provided, and alternative forms of CAPTCHA using output modes for different types of sensory perception are provided to accommodate different disabilities.
Thanks,
AWK
Andrew Kirkpatrick
Group Product Manager, Accessibility
Adobe Systems
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
http://twitter.com/awkawk
http://blogs.adobe.com/accessibility
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Birkir Rúnar Gunnarsson
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 11:09 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: [WebAIM] Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a compliance.
Dear all.
I am hoping for a bit of a shortcut by posting this, rather than
leafing through the WCAG 2.0 standard, because I guess some of you may
have dealt with this situation before.
An Icelandic government web site has put captia on every single load
of the web site (the web site is that of the superior court and they
claim they are protecting the privacy of the individuals in the court
cases from internet searches).
Their captia is completely inaccessible, and nothing on the site can
be activated without having to fill in the captia first.
The government has committed itself (not legally, but in its official
information society policy document) to W3C A compliance .. which I
take to mean WCAG 2.0 Level I compliance, it is never explained
further.
Which part of the WCAG standard does inaccessible captia break?
Does anyone have experience in writing about this before (a letter of
complaint or legal statement of any kind)?
Anything of that nature you can share would be very helpful.
Thank you very much and have a great day y'all.
-B
From: Nancy Johnson
Date: Wed, Feb 02 2011 10:39AM
Subject: Re: Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a compliance.
← Previous message | Next message →
Our software engineer found a transparent captcha. I don't know much
about it, but seemed like a perfect solution both for accessibility
and usability.
Nancy
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:07 AM, Andrew Kirkpatrick < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Under 1.1.1 Non-text Content: All non-text content that is presented to the user has a text alternative that serves the equivalent purpose, except for the situations listed below. (Level A)
>
> CAPTCHA: If the purpose of non-text content is to confirm that content is being accessed by a person rather than a computer, then text alternatives that identify and describe the purpose of the non-text content are provided, and alternative forms of CAPTCHA using output modes for different types of sensory perception are provided to accommodate different disabilities.
>
> Thanks,
> AWK
>
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
> Group Product Manager, Accessibility
> Adobe Systems
>
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> http://twitter.com/awkawk
> http://blogs.adobe.com/accessibility
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Birkir Rúnar Gunnarsson
> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 11:09 PM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: [WebAIM] Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a compliance.
>
> Dear all.
>
> I am hoping for a bit of a shortcut by posting this, rather than
> leafing through the WCAG 2.0 standard, because I guess some of you may
> have dealt with this situation before.
> An Icelandic government web site has put captia on every single load
> of the web site (the web site is that of the superior court and they
> claim they are protecting the privacy of the individuals in the court
> cases from internet searches).
> Their captia is completely inaccessible, and nothing on the site can
> be activated without having to fill in the captia first.
> The government has committed itself (not legally, but in its official
> information society policy document) to W3C A compliance .. which I
> take to mean WCAG 2.0 Level I compliance, it is never explained
> further.
> Which part of the WCAG standard does inaccessible captia break?
> Does anyone have experience in writing about this before (a letter of
> complaint or legal statement of any kind)?
> Anything of that nature you can share would be very helpful.
> Thank you very much and have a great day y'all.
> -B
>
From: Andrew Kirkpatrick
Date: Wed, Feb 02 2011 11:24AM
Subject: Re: Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a compliance.
← Previous message | Next message →
So now NO ONE can see the word provide the answer! :)
Seriously, what's a transparent CAPTCHA?
Thanks,
AWK
Andrew Kirkpatrick
Group Product Manager, Accessibility
Adobe Systems
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
http://twitter.com/awkawk
http://blogs.adobe.com/accessibility
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Nancy Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 12:40 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a compliance.
Our software engineer found a transparent captcha. I don't know much
about it, but seemed like a perfect solution both for accessibility
and usability.
Nancy
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:07 AM, Andrew Kirkpatrick < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Under 1.1.1 Non-text Content: All non-text content that is presented to the user has a text alternative that serves the equivalent purpose, except for the situations listed below. (Level A)
>
> CAPTCHA: If the purpose of non-text content is to confirm that content is being accessed by a person rather than a computer, then text alternatives that identify and describe the purpose of the non-text content are provided, and alternative forms of CAPTCHA using output modes for different types of sensory perception are provided to accommodate different disabilities.
>
> Thanks,
> AWK
>
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
> Group Product Manager, Accessibility
> Adobe Systems
>
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> http://twitter.com/awkawk
> http://blogs.adobe.com/accessibility
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Birkir Rúnar Gunnarsson
> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 11:09 PM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: [WebAIM] Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a compliance.
>
> Dear all.
>
> I am hoping for a bit of a shortcut by posting this, rather than
> leafing through the WCAG 2.0 standard, because I guess some of you may
> have dealt with this situation before.
> An Icelandic government web site has put captia on every single load
> of the web site (the web site is that of the superior court and they
> claim they are protecting the privacy of the individuals in the court
> cases from internet searches).
> Their captia is completely inaccessible, and nothing on the site can
> be activated without having to fill in the captia first.
> The government has committed itself (not legally, but in its official
> information society policy document) to W3C A compliance .. which I
> take to mean WCAG 2.0 Level I compliance, it is never explained
> further.
> Which part of the WCAG standard does inaccessible captia break?
> Does anyone have experience in writing about this before (a letter of
> complaint or legal statement of any kind)?
> Anything of that nature you can share would be very helpful.
> Thank you very much and have a great day y'all.
> -B
>
From: Birkir Rúnar Gunnarsson
Date: Wed, Feb 02 2011 11:51AM
Subject: Re: Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a compliance.
← Previous message | Next message →
Agree, I have a hard time imagining it.
The only accessible captia I have come acrss are questions like
"what is 2 plus 5, write the number here"
type ones
On 2/2/11, Andrew Kirkpatrick < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> So now NO ONE can see the word provide the answer! :)
>
> Seriously, what's a transparent CAPTCHA?
>
> Thanks,
> AWK
>
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
> Group Product Manager, Accessibility
> Adobe Systems
>
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> http://twitter.com/awkawk
> http://blogs.adobe.com/accessibility
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Nancy Johnson
> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 12:40 PM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a compliance.
>
> Our software engineer found a transparent captcha. I don't know much
> about it, but seemed like a perfect solution both for accessibility
> and usability.
>
> Nancy
>
> On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:07 AM, Andrew Kirkpatrick < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> wrote:
>> Under 1.1.1 Non-text Content: All non-text content that is presented to
>> the user has a text alternative that serves the equivalent purpose, except
>> for the situations listed below. (Level A)
>>
>> CAPTCHA: If the purpose of non-text content is to confirm that content is
>> being accessed by a person rather than a computer, then text alternatives
>> that identify and describe the purpose of the non-text content are
>> provided, and alternative forms of CAPTCHA using output modes for
>> different types of sensory perception are provided to accommodate
>> different disabilities.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> AWK
>>
>> Andrew Kirkpatrick
>> Group Product Manager, Accessibility
>> Adobe Systems
>>
>> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>> http://twitter.com/awkawk
>> http://blogs.adobe.com/accessibility
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Birkir Rúnar
>> Gunnarsson
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 11:09 PM
>> To: WebAIM Discussion List
>> Subject: [WebAIM] Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a compliance.
>>
>> Dear all.
>>
>> I am hoping for a bit of a shortcut by posting this, rather than
>> leafing through the WCAG 2.0 standard, because I guess some of you may
>> have dealt with this situation before.
>> An Icelandic government web site has put captia on every single load
>> of the web site (the web site is that of the superior court and they
>> claim they are protecting the privacy of the individuals in the court
>> cases from internet searches).
>> Their captia is completely inaccessible, and nothing on the site can
>> be activated without having to fill in the captia first.
>> The government has committed itself (not legally, but in its official
>> information society policy document) to W3C A compliance .. which I
>> take to mean WCAG 2.0 Level I compliance, it is never explained
>> further.
>> Which part of the WCAG standard does inaccessible captia break?
>> Does anyone have experience in writing about this before (a letter of
>> complaint or legal statement of any kind)?
>> Anything of that nature you can share would be very helpful.
>> Thank you very much and have a great day y'all.
>> -B
>>
From: Jim Allan
Date: Wed, Feb 02 2011 11:57AM
Subject: Re: Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a compliance.
← Previous message | Next message →
perhaps http://blog.fili.nl/articles/the-anti-captcha-challenge/
more at google http://www.google.com/search?hl=&;q=transparent+captcha&sourceid=navclient-ff&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS261US261&ie=UTF-8
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 12:23 PM, Andrew Kirkpatrick < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> So now NO ONE can see the word provide the answer! :)
>
> Seriously, what's a transparent CAPTCHA?
>
> Thanks,
> AWK
>
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
> Group Product Manager, Accessibility
> Adobe Systems
>
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> http://twitter.com/awkawk
> http://blogs.adobe.com/accessibility
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Nancy Johnson
> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 12:40 PM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a compliance.
>
> Our software engineer found a transparent captcha. I don't know much
> about it, but seemed like a perfect solution both for accessibility
> and usability.
>
> Nancy
>
> On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:07 AM, Andrew Kirkpatrick < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>> Under 1.1.1 Non-text Content: All non-text content that is presented to the user has a text alternative that serves the equivalent purpose, except for the situations listed below. (Level A)
>>
>> CAPTCHA: If the purpose of non-text content is to confirm that content is being accessed by a person rather than a computer, then text alternatives that identify and describe the purpose of the non-text content are provided, and alternative forms of CAPTCHA using output modes for different types of sensory perception are provided to accommodate different disabilities.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> AWK
>>
>> Andrew Kirkpatrick
>> Group Product Manager, Accessibility
>> Adobe Systems
>>
>> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>> http://twitter.com/awkawk
>> http://blogs.adobe.com/accessibility
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Birkir Rúnar Gunnarsson
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 11:09 PM
>> To: WebAIM Discussion List
>> Subject: [WebAIM] Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a compliance.
>>
>> Dear all.
>>
>> I am hoping for a bit of a shortcut by posting this, rather than
>> leafing through the WCAG 2.0 standard, because I guess some of you may
>> have dealt with this situation before.
>> An Icelandic government web site has put captia on every single load
>> of the web site (the web site is that of the superior court and they
>> claim they are protecting the privacy of the individuals in the court
>> cases from internet searches).
>> Their captia is completely inaccessible, and nothing on the site can
>> be activated without having to fill in the captia first.
>> The government has committed itself (not legally, but in its official
>> information society policy document) to W3C A compliance .. which I
>> take to mean WCAG 2.0 Level I compliance, it is never explained
>> further.
>> Which part of the WCAG standard does inaccessible captia break?
>> Does anyone have experience in writing about this before (a letter of
>> complaint or legal statement of any kind)?
>> Anything of that nature you can share would be very helpful.
>> Thank you very much and have a great day y'all.
>> -B
>>
From: Nancy Johnson
Date: Thu, Feb 03 2011 6:57AM
Subject: Re: Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a compliance.
← Previous message | Next message →
I just talked with the software engineer and we are using more of the
spam protector, that is coldfusion specific
http://cfformprotect.riaforge.org/
If you type in transparent captcha into google, Wordpress seems to
have several entries.
Sorry for the misinfromation
Nancy
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Jim Allan < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> perhaps http://blog.fili.nl/articles/the-anti-captcha-challenge/
> more at google http://www.google.com/search?hl=&;q=transparent+captcha&sourceid=navclient-ff&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS261US261&ie=UTF-8
>
> On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 12:23 PM, Andrew Kirkpatrick < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>> So now NO ONE can see the word provide the answer! :)
>>
>> Seriously, what's a transparent CAPTCHA?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> AWK
>>
>> Andrew Kirkpatrick
>> Group Product Manager, Accessibility
>> Adobe Systems
>>
>> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>> http://twitter.com/awkawk
>> http://blogs.adobe.com/accessibility
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Nancy Johnson
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 12:40 PM
>> To: WebAIM Discussion List
>> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a compliance.
>>
>> Our software engineer found a transparent captcha. I don't know much
>> about it, but seemed like a perfect solution both for accessibility
>> and usability.
>>
>> Nancy
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:07 AM, Andrew Kirkpatrick < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>>> Under 1.1.1 Non-text Content: All non-text content that is presented to the user has a text alternative that serves the equivalent purpose, except for the situations listed below. (Level A)
>>>
>>> CAPTCHA: If the purpose of non-text content is to confirm that content is being accessed by a person rather than a computer, then text alternatives that identify and describe the purpose of the non-text content are provided, and alternative forms of CAPTCHA using output modes for different types of sensory perception are provided to accommodate different disabilities.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> AWK
>>>
>>> Andrew Kirkpatrick
>>> Group Product Manager, Accessibility
>>> Adobe Systems
>>>
>>> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>>> http://twitter.com/awkawk
>>> http://blogs.adobe.com/accessibility
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Birkir Rúnar Gunnarsson
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 11:09 PM
>>> To: WebAIM Discussion List
>>> Subject: [WebAIM] Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a compliance.
>>>
>>> Dear all.
>>>
>>> I am hoping for a bit of a shortcut by posting this, rather than
>>> leafing through the WCAG 2.0 standard, because I guess some of you may
>>> have dealt with this situation before.
>>> An Icelandic government web site has put captia on every single load
>>> of the web site (the web site is that of the superior court and they
>>> claim they are protecting the privacy of the individuals in the court
>>> cases from internet searches).
>>> Their captia is completely inaccessible, and nothing on the site can
>>> be activated without having to fill in the captia first.
>>> The government has committed itself (not legally, but in its official
>>> information society policy document) to W3C A compliance .. which I
>>> take to mean WCAG 2.0 Level I compliance, it is never explained
>>> further.
>>> Which part of the WCAG standard does inaccessible captia break?
>>> Does anyone have experience in writing about this before (a letter of
>>> complaint or legal statement of any kind)?
>>> Anything of that nature you can share would be very helpful.
>>> Thank you very much and have a great day y'all.
>>> -B
>>>
From: ckrugman@sbcglobal.net
Date: Tue, Feb 08 2011 1:57PM
Subject: Re: Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a compliance.
← Previous message | No next message
there is one site that I've come across where the captcha is actually
readable and the user is asked to retype it in to another box. I found that
it can be selected and then copied to the box as well.
Chuck
----- Original Message -----
From: "Birkir Rúnar Gunnarsson" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: "WebAIM Discussion List" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 10:48 AM
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a compliance.
Agree, I have a hard time imagining it.
The only accessible captia I have come acrss are questions like
"what is 2 plus 5, write the number here"
type ones
On 2/2/11, Andrew Kirkpatrick < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> So now NO ONE can see the word provide the answer! :)
>
> Seriously, what's a transparent CAPTCHA?
>
> Thanks,
> AWK
>
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
> Group Product Manager, Accessibility
> Adobe Systems
>
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> http://twitter.com/awkawk
> http://blogs.adobe.com/accessibility
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Nancy Johnson
> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 12:40 PM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a
> compliance.
>
> Our software engineer found a transparent captcha. I don't know much
> about it, but seemed like a perfect solution both for accessibility
> and usability.
>
> Nancy
>
> On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:07 AM, Andrew Kirkpatrick < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> wrote:
>> Under 1.1.1 Non-text Content: All non-text content that is presented to
>> the user has a text alternative that serves the equivalent purpose,
>> except
>> for the situations listed below. (Level A)
>>
>> CAPTCHA: If the purpose of non-text content is to confirm that content is
>> being accessed by a person rather than a computer, then text alternatives
>> that identify and describe the purpose of the non-text content are
>> provided, and alternative forms of CAPTCHA using output modes for
>> different types of sensory perception are provided to accommodate
>> different disabilities.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> AWK
>>
>> Andrew Kirkpatrick
>> Group Product Manager, Accessibility
>> Adobe Systems
>>
>> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>> http://twitter.com/awkawk
>> http://blogs.adobe.com/accessibility
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Birkir Rúnar
>> Gunnarsson
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 11:09 PM
>> To: WebAIM Discussion List
>> Subject: [WebAIM] Inaccessible captia and WCAG 2.0, level a compliance.
>>
>> Dear all.
>>
>> I am hoping for a bit of a shortcut by posting this, rather than
>> leafing through the WCAG 2.0 standard, because I guess some of you may
>> have dealt with this situation before.
>> An Icelandic government web site has put captia on every single load
>> of the web site (the web site is that of the superior court and they
>> claim they are protecting the privacy of the individuals in the court
>> cases from internet searches).
>> Their captia is completely inaccessible, and nothing on the site can
>> be activated without having to fill in the captia first.
>> The government has committed itself (not legally, but in its official
>> information society policy document) to W3C A compliance .. which I
>> take to mean WCAG 2.0 Level I compliance, it is never explained
>> further.
>> Which part of the WCAG standard does inaccessible captia break?
>> Does anyone have experience in writing about this before (a letter of
>> complaint or legal statement of any kind)?
>> Anything of that nature you can share would be very helpful.
>> Thank you very much and have a great day y'all.
>> -B
>>