Summary
There's been widespread speculation about the new legislation being introduced under the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA), which will ensure that websites are accessible to blind and disabled users. Try to find specific information about it on the Internet and chances are you'll come up empty handed.
The RNIB (Royal National Institute of the Blind) and the DRC (Disability Rights Commission), two of the most renowned advocates for the DDA and accessible websites, have no specific information about the laws and what websites specifically need to do in order to meet the legal requirements.
In this article, Trenton Moss describes how the DDA applies to web accessibility.
Author: Trenton Moss
Japanese translation of this article.
Contents
- What does the Disability Discrimination Act state?
- When does the DDA come into force?
- Can you be sued?
- How do you comply with the DDA?
What does the Disability Discrimination Act state?
Part III of the DDA refers to the provision of goods, facilities and services. The Code of Practice (676Kb PDF Document), which specifically mentions websites, can be downloaded in its entirety from the DRC website.
The relevant quotes from this 175-page document are:
- Page 7, section 2.2
-
The Disability Discrimination Act makes it unlawful for a service provider to discriminate against a disabled person by refusing to provide any service which it provides to members of the public.
- Page 39, section 4.7
-
From 1st October 1999 a service provider has to take reasonable steps to change a practice which makes it unreasonably difficult for disabled people to make use of its services.
- Pages 11-13, section 2.13 to 2.17
-
What services are affected by the Disability Discrimination Act? An airline company provides a flight reservation and booking service to the public on its website. This is a provision of a service and is subject to the act.
- Page 71, section 5.23
-
For people with visual impairments, the range of auxiliary aids or services which it might be reasonable to provide to ensure that services are accessible might include ... accessible websites.
- Page 68, section 5.6
-
For people with hearing disabilities, the range of auxiliary aids or services which it might be reasonable to provide to ensure that services are accessible might include ... accessible websites.
When does the DDA come into force?
It's widely believed that the new laws will be implemented in October of this year, when the final part of the DDA comes into force. This final piece of legislation actually refers to service providers having to consider making permanent physical adjustments to their premises and is not related to the Internet in any way.
Section III of the DDA, which refers to accessible websites, came into force on 1st October 1999 and the Code of Practice for this section of the DDA was published on 27th May 2002. This means that the majority of websites are already in breach of the law.
Can you be sued?
Well, probably. The RNIB claim that they've considered taking up a number of legal cases against organisations with regard to their websites. When they raised the accessibility issues of the website under the DDA, companies have typically made the necessary changes, rather than facing the prospect of legal action.
The DRC launched a formal investigation into 1000 websites (407Kb PDF Document), of which over 80% were next to impossible for disabled people to use. They warned firms that they face legal action under the DDA and the threat of unlimited compensation payments if they fail to make websites accessible for people with disabilities.
How do you comply with the DDA?
It's widely believed that if, or perhaps more appropriately when, a case makes it to court that the W3C accessibility guidelines will be used to assess a website's accessibility and ultimately decide the outcome of the case. The W3C is the Internet governing body and its web accessibility guidelines can be found on its website.
To further complicate matters, the W3C offers three different levels of compliance. Priority 1 guidelines, (which must be satisfied according to the W3C) will almost certainly have to be adhered to. Priority 2 guidelines (which should be satisfied and are the European Union recommended level of compliance), or some part of, will probably need to be adhered to too.
The courts will also no doubt take guidance from the outcome of an Australian case in 2000, when a blind man successfully sued the Sydney Olympics organising committee over their inaccessible website.
This article was contributed by Trenton Moss of Webcredible, where the original article can be viewed in its entirety.
Category: Accessibility.
[web-accessibility-dda.php#comment1]
Are you sure? Check out eventure internet - they disagree!!!
ps - the comment system on this site is too strict. Surely it can correct the odd missing p?
Posted by Samual on
[web-accessibility-dda.php#comment2]
They're misinformed.
Sorry you found the form annoying. If you leave the "Disable HTML" button with a tick, you don't have to write any markup.
Posted by Gez on
[web-accessibility-dda.php#comment3]
Does the DDA make it illegal for a book or newspaper to publish something in the normal printed format if it does not also publish the item in Braille and / or as a talking book?
Does the DDA make it illegal for newspapers / magazines to enclose ads for products services in the normal printed format if the does not also enclose Braille versions?
Does the DDA make it illegal for newspapers / magazines to publish application forms (either in the main publication or in enclosures) if they do not enclose versions of these forms which are usable by the blind?
Does the DDA make it illegal to charge more for Braille versions of publications than for normally-printed versions?
If "yes" to any of these, why have no newspaper / magazine / book publishers been prosecuted?
If "no" to any of these, what justification is there for the DDA imposing such requirements on web pages?
Posted by Philip Chalmers on
[web-accessibility-dda.php#comment4]
Because anyone, regardless of any disabilities they may have, should be able to bank online, purchase goods online, etc, without being hampered by unnecessary barriers. You're not alone in your views, which is why it's a good thing that the DDA explicitly requires that services offered over the web are not discriminatory. The DDA doesn't require that websites are built using some extra special technology; it merely requires that websites are usable without discrimination.
The net result (no pun intended) is a website that benefits all stakeholders, without any negative side effects. Considering the benefits, I'm astonished that anyone would resent an act that ensures that organisations do not actively discriminate.
Posted by Gez on
[web-accessibility-dda.php#comment5]
Gez,
Now try "Because anyone, regardless of any disabilities they may have, should be able to bank BY POST, purchase goods BY POST, etc, without being hampered by unnecessary barriers." Sounds just as reasonable, doesn't it?
What's the justification for imposing accessibility requirements on only one communications medium?
In my opinion:
* It's pure political bullying, because web sites haven't been around long enough to develop as powerful a political lobby as old media.
* It makes entry harder. This only benefits the big players with deep pockets. It's detrimental to the general public because it makes it more difficult for new organisations to promote themselves online.
Posted by Philip Chalmers on
[web-accessibility-dda.php#comment6]
Sorry Philip, I'm strongly with Gez on this one.
Designing and building accessible websites is increasingly just another skill all web people have to have. We already try to make our sites as good as possible for a wide range of people. E.g. Not everybody has broadband, so we all accept that we must optimise our images so that the download is as small as possible whilst ensuring it still looks good; and how many people still think it makes sense to design just for IE and not also ensure Firefox users can use your site?
So why not spend a little time understanding the needs of people who might have visual impairments, poor motor skills or suffer from cognitive problems? It isn't that demanding - if you can understand scripting then you can do accessibility! After all a huge amount of implementing accessibility is just understanding HTML 4.0 and CSS.
And the best bit is that there is a huge payoff. If you design to web standards, then the page will be device independent. It will not only work in a screen reader – but on a PDA too.
We re-developed www.hertsdirect.org to be properly accessible, (we are still working on some complex transactions and contact forms,) and now our content can be accessed from a much wider range of devices. Looking at our logs we are starting to see more and more handhelds starting to access the site and this wouldn’t be possible without the accessibility work.
A website that implements accessibility is also much more likely to be have high usablity - and that's in everybodies interests!
Posted by Richard Ovenden on
[web-accessibility-dda.php#comment7]
Agreed - and also much better search engine positioning.
If a new company wants to promote itself to a subset of its target audience, the DDA allows them to do so. The DDA only affects organisations providing a service online.
Posted by Zoe on
[web-accessibility-dda.php#comment8]
Richard Ovenden said:
Cool! It's encouraging to see local government sites taking accessibility seriously.
Philip said:
I'm not a lawyer, so can't say why the DDA doesn't explicitly cover printed media. If you know of a specific case of someone needing to access a service by paper where no alternative means of access is provided, it would be worth your while taking it up with an organisation that could help, such as the Disability Rights Commission (08457 622 633), or the Royal National Institute of the Blind (0845 766 9999).
The National Talking Newspaper Association of the United Kingdom, is a charity that produce local and national newspapers and magazines in audio format. Interestingly, newspapers and magazines cooperate with the charity, despite potential copyright issues that may arise from such a collaboration.
Out of interest, what is this political lobby you mentioned? Can you provide details?
It's a little disturbing that anyone would resent an act whose aim is to stop discrimination. As a communication medium, the web is a lot more powerful than printed media. I personally believe that the DDA should explicitly cover websites as there should be a means of safeguarding against sites built by people with no ethics, and/or insufficient skills to provide a proper service; after all, there is very little work required to ensure a website is accessible.
Posted by Gez on