|
womble -> RE: Accessibility? Do we need to spend the extra money? (4/8/2005 15:08:01)
|
My pet subject!!!
First of all I thought the site Bobby D put a link for was great, though being a site about accessibility I was disappointed that it didn't have a facility to increase the text size as I've found some that do. Not everyone with visual problems uses screen readers or their own stye sheets. BTW, the RNIB Good Design) site is a good source of info on accessibility, and also has a section on web accessibility. Also, a point to note about hearing not mentioned on the WebAIM site; many profoundly Deaf people who are sign language users whose first language is sign language have poor language skills. It's said that profoundly deaf children leave school with an average reading age of eight, not because they are unintelligent, but because deafness is still a barrier to learning. Any information that's provided in a format that doesn't use plain English, not just websites, will be inaccessible to many profoundly Deaf people.
quote:
His fault? Or the airline's fault?
Now we're into the social versus medical model of disability, and I would say most definitely the airline's. An except from a leaflet I produced for the organisation I do voluntary work for that explains how the two models can be applied to deafness:
quote:
The medical model of disability
It’s natural to think of disability in terms of the individual and how it affects them. This is the traditional way of looking at disability, the medical model of disability. The individual has a medical problem. The individual needs medical help. The individual needs specific help so that they can do things. The medical model looks at causes, symptoms and cures, and often doesn’t take account of the whole person. Disabled people's inability to join in society is seen as a direct result of having an impairment and not as the result of features of our society which can be changed.
For Ddeaf people, hearing loss is classified by the level of hearing loss according to set medical criteria of units of dBHL (decibels and hearing loss). This is the medical model of disability at work.. Emphasis is on classifying that person’s hearing loss and ‘fixing’ it, for example by giving them hearing aids.
In some ways though deafness is unique in that giving someone a hearing aid doesn’t instantly make them 'hearing' in the same way that giving someone who is short-sighted glasses gives them near normal vision. As any hearing aid user will tell you, hearing aids do not give you perfect hearing and only boost, or amplify, your remaining hearing. And what about profoundly deaf people for whom hearing aids don’t help?
The medical model focuses on the individual and what is medically wrong with them, and what can be done to correct the ‘impairment’. The medical model of disability though can make people feel inferior. Deafness is seen as a limitation, using negative phrases such as ‘hearing impaired’. But what does disabled mean? That a Ddeaf person can’t do everything that other people do? The only thing that Ddeaf people can’t do is hear.
The social model of disability
So is there another way of looking at disability? The social model of disability promotes a more positive image. It doesn’t focus on the individual, but on society. The only thing a Ddeaf person can’t do is hear. It’s society’s lack of provision for Ddeaf people that makes them disabled and prevents them from participating equally with hearing people. With the social model, a Ddeaf person is disabled because they can’t for example access the arts. The solution is simple – for example making all theatres accessible by the use of induction loops, captioning and signing.
The fact that not all public places like banks, shops, hospitals…in fact all the places which we all have to visit in our everyday life, have induction loops or that few service providers have staff who can sign makes doing everyday things such a struggle – not the fact that someone is Ddeaf. All Ddeaf people can make their own list of barriers they encounter.
quote:
all sites would end up being text only, kind of like collective punishment, if person A can't do or use something, then Person B, C and D must have it a certain way so everyone is equal.
And why shouldn't everyone be equal? Like jaybee says, no-one's saying accessible sites can't have graphics, that's what the alt and title or longdesc tags are for.
quote:
but is it available on any corner phone that i walk up to?
In the UK all public phones must have an inductive coupler. Obviously though that only helps if you have hearing aids with a 'T' switch.
quote:
(Let's remember here, half these companies do not even know they are supposed to have a site that is workable for impaired/disabled users, if it wasn't for the good Webmasters/Designers telling them.)
Ignorance is not an acceptable defence. The DDA has only been on the statute for 10 years, since 1995. If after 10 years they've not realised that their web presence is used to access their service,product, whatever, "access to goods, facilities and services" as the DDA puts it, then IMO they've only themselves to blame if they get sued.
I think generally the point is that you don't have to spend an awful lot of money to make a site accessible. The point is that accessibility isn't an optional add-on. It's something that has to be considered before you even go anywhere near a computer and start designing a site. Webmasters, designers, and their clients (probably most of all their clients) need to realise that there are things you need to consider before you do anything else, consider the colour scheme you're going to use, how you're going to lay out the information, what sort of language you're going to use, etc.
I've seen it from both sides of the fence. Some years ago when I was working as a PA for a management consultant I was organising a conference, and I knew that one of the attendees was deaf. I'd had dealings with this woman before and she'd complained that I hadn't booked a separate room for group discussions as it would make it easier for her if her group was somewhere quieter, rather than in the main hall. I was trying to economise because we were going over budget, and having to book the extra room to keep her happy sent me over budget. At the time I couldn't see what the big deal was. Over the past 4 years, having lost some sight and hearing due to a neurologiscal condition, I now realise what the big deal was. I've been in similar situations myself and I know it's not much fun when you can't hear what's going on around you.
Just because I now have disabilities doesn't mean I don't still want to do the things I could do before. Yes, there are certain things that aren't possible, but in many cases the things I can't do are because people haven't considered the needs of disabled people.
We do live in an increasingly litiguous society, but, for the vast majority of disabled people who end up resorting to court action, it's because all other methods have failed, and it's the only way to try and stop the discrimination that disabled people face on a daily basis, through no fault of their own.
|
|
|
|
