IMPACT®

Do Sharepoint-created websites breach the Disability Discrimination Act?

Bruce Lawson, a web accessibility expert, certainly thinks so. Lawson writes on the subject for the May 2008 edition of the Internet Newsletter for Lawyers. INfL is a subscription based publication (online and offline), so you'll need to be a member to read the full article.

Lawson's argument about Sharepoint websites breaching the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) breach is based on testing which indicates that such websites breach a number of the Priority 2 criteria of the Web Content Accesibiity Guidelines 1.0 (WCAG). The link between WCAG compliance and the DDA is one that hasn't been discussed by the UK court. Many UK IT lawyers are therefore likely to find Lawson's argument logical, but not necessarily persuasive simply because of lack of case law. In other jurisdictions, the law is more settled because of Court rulings (e.g. see our report on the Californian ruling on Target).

You can read more about the DDA and website accessibility in our IMPACT article "Making websites accessible to all".

The mobile web: another reason for accessible websites

The number of internet-ready mobile phones being offered by the mobile networks on their basic contract packages is steadily increasing, and there are more and more affordable internet packages available for mobile phones. This increase will presumably lead to increasing popularity of the mobile internet. From personal experience, a number of non-geeky friends already use the mobile internet to read the news, check the sports results (best not to mention the rugby!), even their emails. PocketPicks reported in July that there were 18 million mobile internet users in Europe alone.

Of course, anyone who has used the internet on a mobile will tell you that it's by no means perfect. In the Guardian today, Victor Keegan discusses some of the issues in a review of the Opera mobile browser. Reading the article lead me to question, firstly, does a "mobile internet" really exist and, if it does, should it?

Whilst there are an increasing number of websites being designed for use on mobile phones, they are a small proportion of the websites out there. If there is a "mobile internet", it's a very select club and any advanced (or even just curious) internet user is likely to find themselves rapidly finding themselves surfing "normal" websites on their mobile.

On to the second question, should there be a "mobile internet"? My personal view is that there should not; for website owners, having to maintain two versions of their websites is quite an undertaking, and for users, being shoved on to a more basic version of a website simply because of the device they are using isn't great either. Instead, mobile web browsers need to up their game and allow more easy viewing of "normal" sites (as the mobile Opera browsers claims to do). It takes two to tango of course, and to capture the maximum number of users/customers, website owners need to design their websites to be usable on a range of devices.

This brings us, in a slightly stream-of-consciousness manner, on to the subject of website accessibility. Ratger than create mobile specific versions of their websites, my view is that website owners should be putting their efforts into making their website accessible to all. In doing this, they will open their doors not only to the mobile phone audience; they will also go a long way to making themselves generally accessible. This alone should offer a good commercial incentive for websites improving their accessibility.

If the bottom line isn't enough, there is of course the issue that website accessibility is a matter of law in many countries (see our guide to UK web accessibility law). And if web accessibility being the law isn't enough, US class actions such as that which appears to be on the horizon following the Target ruling should send the message home that web accessibility is important. Forget the mobile web, let's create the accessible web.

Target ruling takes website accessibility up the commercial agenda

The Court for the Northern District of California has confirmed a previous ruling that Target.com is inaccessible to the blind, therefore violating federal and state anti-discrimination laws in the USA. What's more, the Court ruled that the case is a class action open to all "legally blind" individuals in the USA. Thanks to Out-law.com for reporting on this matter.

An initial glance through the 33 pages of the ruling suggests that the Court relied upon the plaintiff's evidence of his inability to use the Target.com, in practical terms. The Court doesn't seem to have relied on failure to comply with technical accessibility standards such as the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, as was the case with the the Australian Olympics Committee ruling (see our "Making websites open to all" post from August 2006). This practical consideration of accessibility reinforces the importance of using people to test website accessibility rather than simply relying on automated testing.

Links to Disability Equality Schemes

Following the so-called Disability Equality Duty becoming law on 4 December 2006 (see our article on this), various public authorities have published their Disability Equality Schemes online. This is just a quick post to give our public authority clients links to some of the Schemes out there.

Equality Schemes

• Disability Rights Commission (always a good place to start!)
• Department of Constitutional Affairs
• Greater London Authority
• Leicestershire County Council
• Cheshire County Council

Want more?
A quick Google search pulls up links to many more Disability Equality Schemes.

The public authority Disability Equality Duty becomes law

Today the so-called "Disability Equality Duty" becomes law in the UK. This applies to all UK public bodies, of which there are over 45,000. The Disability Rights Commission has been campaigning for public authorities to "Do the Duty".

The new law is contained in the Disability Discrimination Act 2005, which amends the 1995 Act. This sets out the general duty. This is supplemented by regulations which set out specific duties. I outline both in this note.

Technological aids to accessibility

The BBC has a brief and informative article on accessibility technologies. To quote the article:

"Only 13% of people are born with their disability, the other 80% - in this country, and I presume it's similar worldwide - acquire their disability," said Pamela Hardaker of AbilityNet.

"So for some people, when they acquire a disability it is imperative that they learn how to use technology to help fill in the gaps in their lives that their disability has created."

Of course, funky technological aids are useful, but a lot of the time they aren't much use if the software or website they are being used with hasn't been designed to be accessible.

There are further articles on accessibility in the accessibility category of IMPACT.

30 top UK online retailers do not meet meet WCAG guidelines

A report by Nomensa, an accessible website design agency, has found that none of the top 30 UK online retailers comply with the most basic standard of accessibility under the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 1.0.

Accessibility: the Shades of Doom example

When I talk to clients about accessibility, they sometimes ask "does this mean I have to use plain text?" and "does this mean I cannot design my systems to look nice?"

I've discussed this issue in a previous post but a friend recently showed me something that illustrates just how far you can go to make technology accessible to those with disabilities. You may have heard of or played one of the Doom games or another 3d shooter. Well, GMA Games has come up with an entirely audio-based game inspired by Doom. Shades of Doom is an impressive example of what you can do without relying on graphics. If you have a moment, take a look at the GMA Games website and see what other games they have come up with for the visually impaired.

Whilst I'm not saying that you should come up with audio-only versions of your software or websites, Shades of Doom shows just what you can do when you think afresh about accessibility issues.

Accessibility means usability

I noticed a great  story on the BBC News website about an initiative to make technology more usable. The story drives homes the point that accessibility isn't just of benefit to those with disabilities. Accessibility means greater usability of technology, something of benefit to all.

Making websites open to all

Websites have a legal duty to be accessible to disabled people. With new laws on accessibility likely and a strong commercial case for making websites accessible, businesses need to take this issue seriously.

It is ten years since the Disability Discrimination Act (“DDA”) became law. The legal duties imposed by the DDA come into force gradually. Most businesses that we have spoken to seem to think that the obligations only began applying to websites in 2004. In fact, websites have had a legal duty to be accessible to the disabled since 1999.