Which countries accessibility laws to follow?
Following on from Mike@TheWhippinpost's post in anoher thread:
| Mike@TheWhippinpost wrote: |
| All this begs the question; Is the worldwide designer community about to become tied in legal knots by the laws and differing required standards of different Countries? |
Accessify Forum Administrator ~ Nigel Peck / MIS Web Design
"Everything I say is not meant to be set in stone" - Van Morrison
Share: 
If you follow the guidelines of WAI, I would have thought you're likely to be operating within the law of any country. I don't know that for definite, as I obviously don't know every country's law, and how strict they are enforcing it. Section 508 seems to be more than adequately covered by WCAG 1.0. From what I've seen so far of WCAG 2.0, I think it should provide even better guidance.
Share:
Thanks Nigel, you were quite right to make a seperate thread for it.
Yeah, reading the related thread this was derived from it seems to me there could be a danger of different countries - lobbied by their own interested pressure groups - developing their own legally obliging standards that are wholly or partly out of step with the standards we're struggling to adopt/formulate already.
Like you Gez, I don't profess to know each and every applicable law as it applies in each and every country - I don't even know the current standards by heart, but I know where to go for reference.
If we start having different geo-based-standards, even minor differences, I feel it will set the battle for the hearts and minds of designers back considerably...possibly permanently if one caters for an international audience!
More reason than ever for places like this to group together and make a voice...in rapid time perhaps!
Share:
| Mike@TheWhippinpost wrote: |
|
Like you Gez, I don't profess to know each and every applicable law as it applies in each and every country - I don't even know the current standards by heart, but I know where to go for reference. If we start having different geo-based-standards, even minor differences, I feel it will set the battle for the hearts and minds of designers back considerably...possibly permanently if one caters for an international audience! More reason than ever for places like this to group together and make a voice...in rapid time perhaps! |
100% agree- which was the reasoning behnd my Accessible Design Manifesto thread.
Share:
| Kev wrote: | ||
100% agree- which was the reasoning behnd my Accessible Design Manifesto thread. |
Absolutely Kev - Have sandwich-board, will travel
Last thing we need is a battle of the standards war breaking out because if the war between VHS v Betamax and M$ and...everyone! is to go by, we're bound to end up with the inferior platform
Share:
I thought I'd mention here something I've just referred to in a different thread - the EuroAccessibility Consortium. It consists of organisations from around Europe who are in some way involved in assessing web accessibility and/or advising European governments on web accessibility issues, and one of the aims of the consortium is to develop consistent and agreed standards for web accessibility across the whole of Europe. But not by replacing the WAI guidelines - rather the intention is to work with these guidelines, and use them as the basis for establishing a consistent, Europe-wide "e-accessibility" mark or logo, which will mean exactly the same in one European country as it does in another.
See http://www.euroaccessibility.org for more info.
Current UK members of the consortium: RNIB, RNID, AbilityNet UK and Accessinmind Ltd.
Share:
Thanks dms 
Accessify Forum Administrator ~ Nigel Peck / MIS Web Design
"Everything I say is not meant to be set in stone" - Van Morrison
Share:
| gez wrote: |
| Section 508 seems to be more than adequately covered by WCAG 1.0. From what I've seen so far of WCAG 2.0, I think it should provide even better guidance. |
There is one Section 508 Guideline NOT covered under WCAG 1.0. It's 1194.22 (p) Time Delays. However, (according to the most recent draft), the WCAG 2.0 will address it.
Share:
| Anitra_Pavka wrote: |
|
There is one Section 508 Guideline NOT covered under WCAG 1.0. It's 1194.22 (p) Time Delays |
i thought this WCAG1.0 guideline covered it http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/#gl-movement ?
Patrick H. Lauke / webmaster / University of Salford
co-lead: WaSP Accesibility Task Force
take it to the streets ... WaSP Street Team
personal: splintered | photographia | redux
co-author: Web Accessibility - Web Standards and Regulatory Compliance
Share:
| redux wrote: | ||
i thought this WCAG1.0 guideline covered it http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/#gl-movement ? |
Hi Anitra, it's good to see you here.
Section 508 tends do deal with WCAG 1.0 priority 1 issues, with the exception of 1194.22 (n) Electronic Forms. Anitra is correct, as there isn't an exact match for 1194.22 (p) in WCAG 1.0. Guideline 7 of WCAG 1.0 implicitly deals with time delays, whereas 1194.22 (p) explicitly deals with time delays, so there is a definite difference between the two guidelines. However, following WCAG 1.0 Guideline 7 would mean you wouldn't have pages that timed out at all, which more than adequately covers 1194.22 (p).
Share: