Accessibility & US Laws (Re: [thelist] Flash, usability, accessibility)

Laurel Nevans laureln at qwestinternet.net
Sat Jun 8 14:25:01 CDT 2002


There is a "little-known" US law that predates the ADA: The
Rehabilitation Act of 1973.  In fact, much of the ADA is based on
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, but designed to "hvae teeth" in
areas that the Rehab Act did not.  Section 508 WAS originally a
part of the Rehab Act of 1973.  The last round of
reauthorizations of the Rehab Act of '73 kind of pulled out 508
and broadened it.

In short: the ADA suppliments the Rehab Act of 1973, but does not
supplant it.  The Rehab Act of 1973, in short, said that any
entity receiving federal $ had to make its services accessible.
Interpretations of the rehab act, however, usually allowed
"separate but equal" kinds of accommodations, but, it DID require
that disabilities be accommodated.

Historically, blind and VI people have had the strongest lobbying
groups.  Hence, blind/VI access issues have been brought to the
fore front, whilt disabilitiy groups without a strong lobbying
branch have not been accommodated as well.  The internet has
somewhat changed this, as it allows disabilitiy groups to "meet"
and perform advocacy in cyberspace; a lot of the transit and
access issues of such groups have been mitigated by the internet.

My point in all of this is that companies receiving ANY types of
federal $ have been required to be accessible since 1973.
However, before the 90s, there were no provisions for monetary
damages, and enforcement was spotty.  Folks didn't necessarily
point out access issues b/c they did not have the mecahnisms to
do so.  The rise of the internet have given such folks voices,
and these voices have persuaded the Feds to strengthen all
accessibility regs.

In terms of enforcement, the word is not to file an
ADA/disability suit in Texas b/c you'll probably lose.  DOJ is
not doing a great job of enforcing regs, but disability groups
are pressuring them to do so.  Because so much advocacy is
coordinated through the Internet, folks who do business on the
internet are at greater risk of being "found" by an advocacy
group and being "called" on their lack of compliance.  Advocacy
groups will use '73 if it applies and ADA does not.  They will
seek out the types of government $ you receive, and will use this
information to demonstrate you ARE required to comply with
disability law.

If your company receives NO federal $, you are freer to "choose"
to exclude large portions of your potential audience.  If your
company is on the GSA schedule, however, or sells one iota of
anything to the government, you MUST comply w/ Federal
accessibility regs.

IANAL, but I WAS a certified rehabilitation counselor who was
required to intimately know all Federal disability laws since WWI
(the beginning of US disability laws, passed to help soldiers
injured in WWI).  There is an 80+ year history of disability
legislation, and unless you can be sure that none of it applies
to you, you're wise not to ignore it.

CAN flash sites be accessible?  Yes, they can if they are
developed properly.  Do you need to know if they are developed
properly?  I like to CYA and ensure my sites are.  Often times, I
accomplish this by placing a small "text navigation" link in the
same color as my background at the top of every page.  Then I can
use any fancy navigation system I want, while assuring an
accessible navigation system is always available for folks who
use text browsers, keyboard surfing (they'll see the marching
ants around my link), no javascript, no flash, etc.  Then I know
I'm doing my job, even if the client insists they do not have to
adhere to accessibility laws.

One example where this saved me:  I developed a site for a
private preschool who said they did not need to worry about
accessibility, as they offered no scholarships or financial aid.
Well, a few months later, DC Public Schools placed a special ed
student in their preschool.  They NOW needed to follow
accessibility regs, as the $ that were paying that student's
tuition were Federal $, given to DCPS, who was using them to pay
tuition.  The preschool did not see how this one placement
effected them.  I did.  Did anyone compalin about their site?
No.  BUT i ensured that their site DID in fact comply when I
developed it, despite their assurances that I did not need to.
So no re-engineering was needed now that accessibility laws
applied to them.

Another example:  I know a private contractor who sells power
supplies to the FAA.  As a favor, I did a site critique. I turned
off graphics and javascript before checking the site.  I could
not get past the 1st page.  My friend said "who surfs that way"
and ignored my critique.  The FAA accepted the site, until an
engineer using it complained a couple months later.  The site
needed to be completely re-engineered, or thet faced losing the
FAA contract.

Why "reinvent the wheel"?  Why do something twice b/c you cut
corners the 1st time?  Why not anticipate that someone somewhere
in the Federal government might be interested in your product,
and so make sure your site will comply so you DON'T face the
choice of redeveloping or losing a sale?  It takes so little time
to do so, and then you don't have to worry about legal scouring
obscure US laws to figure out if they apply.  I figure the extra
development dollars are far less than the hourly rate you'll need
to pay a lawyer should an issue arise.

Can you make a site full of bells and whistles and still meet US
federal regs for accessibility?  I say yes, but it's a lot easier
if you set out to do so in the beginning than if you try to do it
as an afterthought.  And there are several tools readily
available to help you do so.

Laurel




More information about the thelist mailing list