I disagree,
For example, currently on the amazon website they market something called
disability customer service...without proper marketing explanation.
Further they currently, or at least recently marketed an option for those
wanting a simplified avenue to the site. meaning the marketing team
realized that some people just seek to get their shopping done. If you
are going to advertise as much, you should provide what is advertised, and
they are not doing this now.
Question is why because they can afford to provide these solutions. i
personally suspect their token staff, defining access by themselves
instead of universal web design practices.
On Sun, 25 Aug 2019, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:
That's impossible for a simple marketing reason. Marketers know the
most expensive thing that can be changed about a product and web sites
are products is packaging. The only way possible for any progress is
through litigation since litigation will cost more than packaging
changes would have cost for the example corporations.
On Sun, 25 Aug 2019, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019 08:35:27
From: Linux for blind general discussion <blinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: Linux for blind general discussion <blinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: amazon?
Personally, all I want ouit of Amazon is the /option/ to use a simpler site,
with no legal beating over the head with a stick and nobody jumping up and
down and threatening to sue Amazon under legislation. I'd rather Amazon do it
off their own back. I'd rather, say, use Amazon's mobile site that would be
less cluttered and easy to navigate (since I find Amazon insaley hard to use,
even before losing my sight it was a pain in the butt to get around honestly,
I don't know why they feel like they got to clutter up the pages so much). I
just want options, without legal precedent, and for the record, I ain't in the
US so all the talk of ADA does not apply here, though given my country is just
about gearing up to spectacularly implode.....the ADA does not apply here. I
actually don't know if we have website accessibility reules here, if we do
I've rarely if ever seen them reported by the media here, the sole sources I
find are all US-centric.
And that raises another point. Let's say that Japan adopts new legislation.
Amazon.jp will, for argument's sake, comply. Amazon.de won't comply with the
Japanese legislation because...Germany is not Japan. Amazon.br won't because
Brazil is not Germany. Point is, every country has their own legislation they
go by. Amazon can't point to the ADA and say see, that's our global standard,
because every country treats accessibility differently, so if Amazon /wanted/
to comply with all the rules, they'd need to go over every single site in
every country they operate in, and comply with the local laws. Which would be
slow going, and costly.
On 25/08/2019 05:44, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:
Amazon does business in other countries where such standard requirements do
exist.
Besides, Amazon? is not claiming that it need not be inclusive. Rather it is
pretending, without? cross platform testing and actual attempts to provide a
uniform experience, that it exists with them.
On Sat, 24 Aug 2019, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:
Congress has not attached web accessibility guidelines to the ADA,
guidelines were not established under President Obama and President Trump's
administration is officially not pursuing any such guidelines.
https://www.boia.org/blog/is-website-accessibility-required-under-the-ada
Amazon is not covered under Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, as the
Department of the Navy is.
Don't get me wrong, I think the ADA extends to web sites, and I think
Domino's will lose, but the legal question has yet to be settled. This
would all be moot if the DoJ under Obama or Trump had adopted the WCAD 2.0
standards as the standards applying to web accessibility under the ADA.
On 8/24/19 3:02 PM, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:
?I predict Dominos will have its clock thoroughly cleaned.? Precedent
?even in the Supreme Court isn't on their side.
?Congress made it clear what accessibility requirements are in the
?accessibility process and that happened in 2010.? There's about 16
?technical requirements and a Preamble to Section 508 and this was
?something D.O.D. got measured against in 2012 when Obama required a
?D.O.D.-wide accessibility report.? End result of that was the United
?States Navy was Accessibility Leader and the United States Navy was
?still left with serious problems and all other components had much work
?to do.? I know about that having worked for the Navy during that time.
?On Sat, 24 Aug 2019, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:
? Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2019 15:53:37
? From: Linux for blind general discussion <blinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
? To: blinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx
? Subject: Re: amazon?
? Amazon is definitely aware of Linux. They have apps running on
Android >? and
? even platforms that use Android as their OS. They support Linux
in AWS
? including their own flavor of Linux. I'm sure their are some
staff at >? Amazon
? who don't know about Linux, but that doesn't mean the company is
unaware >? of or
? doesn't care about Linux.
? BTW, there is still a legal question as to whether a web site
which >? offers
? products or services to the public needs to be accessible. The
ADA >? doesn't
? have companion guidelines on what it means for a site to be
accessible >? and
? Domino's is going to court to claim that the ADA doesn't require
them to >? make
? their site or apps accessible. I think the ADA does apply to
public web >? sites,
? and I think Domino's will lose, but that doesn't mean it isn't
still an >? open
? legal question.
? On 8/24/19 2:11 PM, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:
? 1. My comment regarding Linux is based on direct communications
with > >? Amazon
? staff,? who have confessed not to have heard of it,and? who
have no > >? direct
? contact with their so called accessibility team when problems
arise.
? 2. them properly compiled? elinks and links function with java
script.
? 3.? Access is tied to interaction which is why even later
editions of > >? lynx
? can manage some scripting, submit buttons for example.
? 4. since adaptive technology is often a substitution for
the persons > >? eyes,
? hands, brain, and the like, what gives you the right to state that
? technology choices are not tied to physical mandates?? How does
your > >? stance
? differ from those who claim that access need not exist at all,?
or > >? that all
? those sharing? a label are the same?
? 5. the names of access or other individuals at amazon
confirming your
? assumption here?? the legal stance is that if a site serves the ?
public, an
? individual can expect equal public access...which is why?
alternative
? doors??? are to exist? in the first place.
? How do you know what low graphics can or cannot do if you do
not > >? follow
? their development?? This is about keyboard response which
exists in
? graphical? browsers like elinks and links.
? On Fri, 23 Aug 2019, Linux for blind general
discussion wrote:
? I don't believe for a minute that the accessibility staff
at Amazon > > >? has
? either forgotten or stopped caring about Linux accessibility. ?
Realistically
? though, it is possible that they have stopped worrying about
the > > >? very small
? number of people who still use text-based browsers and expect
them > > >? to work
? for shopping, banking and other modern internet tasks. The
thing is > > >? Linux
? accessibility in 2019 != lynx/links/elinks accessibility. In
fact, > > >? this
? hasn't been the case since about 2008 or so
? .
? Unfortunately, text-based browsers have not kept up with the
rest of > > >? the
? internet, and can't be expected to work well for most
websites > > >? without a
? major overhaul, especially since they don't even support the
latest > > >? HTML5
? standards, nor do they support accessibility standards that
have > > >? been in
? place for years. Even w3m doesn't fully support the w3c's own ?
standards.
? Yes, I can see why some people may want these
light-weight and fast
? browsers to work with Amazon, and yes, they should be made
aware of > > >? the
? problems that people are having. But to say that Amazon
doesn't care > > >? about
? Linux accessibility because their site doesn't work with a >
? text-based
? browser is at best a gross exageration, and is at worst a
grave > > >? disservice
? to those of us who use Linux and a screen reader at the same
time.
? Imetumwa kutoka miti
_______________________________________________
? Blinux-list mailing list
? Blinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
_______________________________________________
? Blinux-list mailing list
? Blinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx
? https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
--
Christopher (CJ)
Chaltain at Gmail
_______________________________________________
Blinux-list mailing list
Blinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
_______________________________________________
Blinux-list mailing list
Blinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
_______________________________________________
Blinux-list mailing list
Blinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
--
_______________________________________________
Blinux-list mailing list
Blinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
_______________________________________________
Blinux-list mailing list
Blinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list