Web Accessibility Gets a Boost In California Court

The Register is reporting on developments in a California court case pitting blind users against the retailer Target over the lack of accessibility of Target.com. (We discussed the matter on two occasions last year.) The case is being brought under a federal statute, the Americans With Disabilities Act, and two California laws that are somewhat broader. Even though Target has made improvements to the site since losing the first phase in court, the judge has just ruled that the case is eligible for class-action status. The end result could be mandated accessibility for for all Web sites reachable by visually impaired users in California.

Comments

Yay lowest common denominator

[heinousjay]

This isn't going to be a popular opinion at all.

Why is it my job (metaphorically speaking) to ensure those who are disabled can use my facilities? Why isn't it their job to somehow adapt? Is it my fault someone else can't see, hear, walk, or think clearly? Frankly, too bad on them. You got a shitty roll of the dice. Life sucks.

Stupidity and Lobby

[Tom]

Honestly (and I know I'm gonna be modded down for this, but let's face it, half of us think this and don't dare say it) I hate these kinds of laws and court cases.

So you have a disability. Sorry for you. Why, exactly, is this my problem? If I want my shop to be accessible (or, in my case, my online game), then I'll invest whatever amount of time and effort it's worth to me. If I don't, then you can shop somewhere else.

Regulations like these are ok when it comes to essential and public services, such as public transport or administration buildings (where, after all, you have to go personally to collect your new passport, file your papers, or whatever).

Zero support from me for regulations of this kind on private business. Even though the lobby of disabled organisations (most of whom, interestingly, are not disabled themselves, figure that) tries to create the impression, this has nothing whatsoever to do with "erecting barriers". Sorry, those four steps on the entrance of my 14th century building aren't something I put there with the purpose of keeping wheelchair users out, you know? They just happened to be there and have been there since before the wheelchair was invented (17th century, btw).

Same with my website. If your browser can't display my website in a way that makes it easy for you to use it, that isn't my fault. It's not as if I'd be writing it specifically in-accessible for you. If you can't read my page, then again, you are free to go somewhere else, there's a couple billion other pages online. And again, if you have a specific problem, you can mail me and maybe I care and change (note: "change", not "fix", it wasn't broken!) the site for you. Actually, I do care and I probably will, if you can tell me or I can find out easily what exactly needs changed. But I very much dislike being told that I have to do it.

Ooops, sorry if that turned into a rant.