Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 Now Final

beetle496 writes "It has been going on nine years now, but finally there are formal standards for Web accessibility for technologies other than HTML. They ask that you start with the press release (lots of links), but regulars might be more entertained by the last time WCAG made the front page here. Many folks here will point out that web accessibility is old hat, and by implication this is hardly news, but if you do Web development for any government organization, you should expect that accessibility is a base requirement. The Section 508 standards are to be updated (relatively) soon too."

Comments

Good luck to the lazy ones

[Anonymous Coward]

Good luck with your non-CSS, table-based layout, javascript and Flash-required things you like to refer to as "websites".

Solutions in search of a problem?

[twmcneil]

Is it just me or are most of these Accessibility Standards (sadly) just not worth the time and trouble?

I am hearing impaired. What's the accessibility standard to help me enjoy a podcast? Do we require closed captioning for all podcasts? Require a written transcript to be posted with every podcast?

Sure, there's plenty of podcasts I'd like to "listen" to and can't but for each pound of extra baggage we pile on a publisher, we reduce the incentive to publish. How long before all this well-intentioned madness starts to limit the amount of good material that is published?

The inevitable end result is an artificial reduction in the amount of material available to all.

Re:Solutions in search of a problem?

[FatMacDaddy]

I couldn't disagree more.

I guess they're not worth your time and trouble as long as you can get to most of what you want. Nearly one in four Americans has some sort of disability, so savvy publishers who don't want to lose out on a big chunk of marketshare find it worthwhile to comply.

In the case of commerical sites, vendors find that disabled users are a loyal lot and will keep frequenting sites and businesses that support their needs. And they won't waste time struggling with a non-compliant site if the competition is compliant.

The argument that this puts undue burden on content providers is BS. The same thing was said about forcing car makers to include seat belts, and on and on. Like the cutouts in sidewalks, not just disabled people benefit from the efforts to accommodate their needs; the general public does, too.

Lastly, while it is well intentioned for general use, 508 applies only to things being provided to the (US) Government. If you didn't factor in the costs of accessibility into your bid, then too bad for you.

Re:Solutions in search of a problem?

[Metaphorically]

Sorry but wtf are people doing on Mount Everest that's so important?

To use your metaphor, there's been a lot of sending people up Mount Everest while someone in a wheelchair can't get around at work.