I disagree with some of the assumptions in this post. First, I don't
think it's arduous or slow going to make a site accessible from the get
go. I also think these companies do enough business in these different
countries to justify the time and expense in making their sites
accessible. Amazon does enough business in Japan to justify making their
Japanese site accessible Finally, if a site follows the WCAD 2.0
standards, then any other changes they have to make should be trivial.
Note that the WCAD 2.0 standards are international and their are no
published standards for web accessibility under the ADA.
--
Christopher (CJ)
Chaltain at Gmail
On 8/25/19 7:35 AM, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:
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
--
Christopher (CJ)
Chaltain at Gmail
_______________________________________________
Blinux-list mailing list
Blinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list