Accessability

[morningstar2651]

Is it unethical to create a website that is either difficult or impossible for handicapped persons to view? Why or why not?

CF fails section 508 standards as well as all levels of WCAG standards. I can only imagine the difficulties of a blind person coming to this website.

http://www.contentquality.com/

 

[morningstar2651]

In fact, CF may also be dangerous for people who suffer from epilepsy.

 

[Alecto]

Not to be mean or anything. But if someone is blind....why are they on a computer, a machine that is 90% visual based

 

[Blackmarch]

Is it unethical to create a website that is either difficult or impossible for handicapped persons to view? Why or why not?

CF fails section 508 standards as well as all levels of WCAG standards. I can only imagine the difficulties of a blind person coming to this website.

http://www.contentquality.com/

....
What about all the punk rock sites that have flashing colors, like red and black?

Second if the person is handicapped sightwise, it's going to be extremely difficult to use a computer in the first place. Luckily the OS usually has settings that allow a handicapped person to use their computer better; either by enlarging the view on the screen or have the computer read the text for them (and in some cases recieve audio input from the handicapped, to perform functions)

 

[lawtonfogle]

to answer your question. No, is it wrong to write a book a blind person cann't read, or a song a deaf person cannot hear. They are disabled, meaning they can't do some things. If they can, then there not disabled.

 

[morningstar2651]

Not to be mean or anything. But if someone is blind....why are they on a computer, a machine that is 90% visual based

A blind person might want to use the internet, learn things, send email, etc.

Also, some people that are legally blind arent completely blind, they may have difficulty reading small text sizes or need to read with a magnifying glass.

There are web browsers that read content to blind people that use the internet. One of the biggest problems that websites have is non-descriptive alt tags on images. The screen reader says what is stored in the alt tag so that a blind person knows what the image is of...if your computer just sits there and says "image...image...image..." you get nothing out of a website.

I'm working on my own website currently to put it up at a later date. It's currently validating at WCAG-AA (Priority 2) -- just about the only thing I have to do to get it to WCAG-AAA (Priority 3 - the best possible) is make sure that my animated image isn't too distracting.

 

[Code-Monkey]

I would hope that the person who's easily effected by seizures from epilepsy, that they'd be turning off javascript and perhaps some other features that cause flashing lights. They really don't add much to the whole internet experience. There are browsers and/or features that can be turned off. And there are a number of quality tools for people with various disabilities.

 

[Anti-Fear]

The internet, books, cds, education are all discriminatory towards mentally retarded people. We should dumb everything down so they understand.

 

[Blackmarch]

The internet, books, cds, education are all discriminatory towards mentally retarded people. We should dumb everything down so they understand.

Isn't there eneugh already down to that level?

 

[morningstar2651]

How about versions of pages written in simple English for those who are just learning to read the language or using an online translator? Wikipedia is kind enough to do so, although their simple English version doesn't cover the same breadth of topics as their English version.

Wikipedia in Simple English

 

[HouseApe]

Is it unethical to create a website that is either difficult or impossible for handicapped persons to view? Why or why not?

CF fails section 508 standards as well as all levels of WCAG standards. I can only imagine the difficulties of a blind person coming to this website.

http://www.contentquality.com/

I don't know about being unethical, but it certainly is not very nice.

 

[HouseApe]

Not to be mean or anything. But if someone is blind....why are they on a computer, a machine that is 90% visual based

Computers are only 90% visual because programs are written that way. Humans can locate and process information much more quickly if presented visually than aurally, which is why people hate automated voice systems so much.

The Internet could be 100% aural if it were set up that way. Of course, it would be highly detrimental to the porn industry.

 

[trunks2k]

Depends on what exactly your standards are, and what the function of the website is. Some websites have functions that are next to impossible to turn into something that can be accessible.

Morality aside, there are certain things that every website should be doing in terms of accessibility that just makes for good website design. These include:

- Descriptive links
- Organized data that can be easily described
- Alt tags for images.
- Transcripts of audio clips.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

Is it unethical to create a website that is either difficult or impossible for handicapped persons to view? Why or why not?

CF fails section 508 standards as well as all levels of WCAG standards. I can only imagine the difficulties of a blind person coming to this website.

http://www.contentquality.com/

http://www.christianforums.com/t1748869-attn-christian-forums-welcomes-all.html

 

[morningstar2651]

http://www.christianforums.com/t1748869-attn-christian-forums-welcomes-all.html

Yay!

The Internet could be 100% aural if it were set up that way. Of course, it would be highly detrimental to the porn industry.

I'm trying to imagine an electronic voice being pornographic...but it just wouldn't work. Some people may view this as a good thing though.

The website I am creating will be hosted on the university server of the university I'm transferring to. It will contain information about myself, projects that I've completed, and some various writings of mine.

The website so far...

Validates as XHTML 1.1 (I'm still waiting on the 2.0 working draft to become a recommendation)

Uses Valid CSS (I have a style sheet for the screen, for printing, and for aural browsers)

Complies with WCAG Priority 2

I'm going to head over to that thread CC posted and post my aural style sheet.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

Yay!

I'm trying to imagine an electronic voice being pornographic...but it just wouldn't work. Some people may view this as a good thing though.

The website I am creating will be hosted on the university server of the university I'm transferring to. It will contain information about myself, projects that I've completed, and some various writings of mine.

The website so far...

Validates as XHTML 1.1 (I'm still waiting on the 2.0 working draft to become a recommendation)

Uses Valid CSS (I have a style sheet for the screen, for printing, and for aural browsers)

Complies with WCAG Priority 2

I'm going to head over to that thread CC posted and post my aural style sheet.

Don't forget to pat yourself on the back.
We may disagree at times, but we can be united in your efforts to learn/provide for those that do not have the same blessings that most of us take for granted.