Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(http://news.com)   Judge rules ADA does not apply to Internet   (news.com.com) divider line 52
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

118 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Oct 2002 at 1:35 AM (12 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



52 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2002-10-22 12:45:05 AM  
yjod divld@
 
2002-10-22 12:52:48 AM  
I'll agree with that. I don't want to have to cater to people with ADHD, blindness, color blindness or anything. Now, I'm sure that I would if I wanted to cater to that market share, but as it is? Screw it.
 
2002-10-22 01:37:38 AM  
How exactly do you make a web site accessible to the blind?
 
2002-10-22 01:39:32 AM  
Okay, now I read the article. The guy used a voice reader. Fair enough. But if he really wanted to order tickets, wouldn't it be easier for him to just do it over the telephone?
 
2002-10-22 01:39:57 AM  
ok. way to much special intrest advocacy here. other than being completely ludicrous this suit had nothing going for it.
 
2002-10-22 01:41:20 AM  
hahaha
thats...RETARDED


hehe get it?
 
2002-10-22 01:42:46 AM  
The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which includes Florida
 
2002-10-22 01:44:01 AM  
I want every website to cater to me and me alone.
 
2002-10-22 01:45:01 AM  
*pats Andonbray on the head*

We know you do honey, but you'll get over it.
 
2002-10-22 01:45:26 AM  
fark the blind. And I don't care if they get mad about my saying that, either... What can they do about it? They can't see me, so they can't get the first punch in.
 
2002-10-22 01:46:33 AM  
I get covered by the ADA in univerisity and at work, but... There's not a snowball's chance in hell I'd advocate making the web cater to the blind. It's yahoos like that that make people turn against what is truly effective legislation.

/rant off
 
2002-10-22 01:48:03 AM  
Pattonx - Some of us have screen readers.
 
2002-10-22 01:48:51 AM  
fark the blind. And I don't care if they get mad about my saying that, either... What can they do about it? They can't see me, so they can't get the first punch in.

Unless they're Rutger Hauer in Blind Fury:
[image from cover09.cduniverse.com too old to be available]
 
2002-10-22 01:54:24 AM  
Way to go, Stevarooni, you named 2 of my afflictions. Guess which 2, asshat.
 
2002-10-22 01:54:24 AM  
My father went blind early in life (and I may follow) but this is just stupid. You know what he did when there was something like flight plans to make and he couldn't read the flight schedule? He asked for farking help.

You can't expect everyone to bend over backwards to silly demands for people with any conceivable disability.
 
2002-10-22 01:56:12 AM  
why are the blind even allowed to live?
 
2002-10-22 01:56:40 AM  
What a dumbass. If you're going to go to all the trouble of suing someone, make it fun. Sue Jerry Falwell's bigot ass because you can't read his homophobic crap.

Make him spend a gazillion dollars fixing his website so it talks to you or something, and then say, "WHAT?!?! THAT'S what you meant?!!?!? That's farkin' stupid you ignorant, evil bastard! Now I'm gonna sue you to take it OFF my computer!!!! Bwahahahaha!"
 
2002-10-22 01:58:10 AM  
I'm extremely fortunate to not be handicapped. But you know what I do when a business makes it difficult for me to do business with them? I find somewhere else to do my business. This is America, vote with your wallet.

On a related note. Southwest Airlines continues to get my business because they make overweight people buy two seats.
 
2002-10-22 01:58:23 AM  
Fark the Farking Farkers.

I jus read the judges 12 page summary......
first, what a concise writer he is, I loved reading it.
second, fark em all, let God sort them out.
third, Rutger Hauer kix arse, theres this guy at the 7-11 at the corner who looks like Mr. Hauer, but he doesnt like me making the reference cause I keep refering to the movie [i] The Hitcher[/i]....
Fourth,[i] the blind leading the blind down a blind alley = anyone on the internet at this point, [/i]mr blind guy, use your acute intuition and other greatly enhanced skills to cypher the internet out as best as the rest of us are. at least you cant see the distractions we have to deal with....ads, porn, virus, spam, and mor porn.
 
2002-10-22 01:58:34 AM  
The Judge probably ruled correctly, but it would be nice if some of these big sites would get a clue. The whole Idea of html is to be browser independant and to let the user have a bit of control over presentation. The net has opened a whole new world to the blind, but it could be better. Lynx forever!
 
2002-10-22 01:58:50 AM  
ADA - American Dental Association? I say let the orthodontists on the net, but not the gum surgeons...

Oh... never mind.
 
2002-10-22 02:00:19 AM  
Anyone know a deaf person who wants to sue RIAA?
 
2002-10-22 02:01:02 AM  
Sometimes in life you just have to accept that you are unable to do some things. Mountain climbing for people with no legs is is something they can't do, there shouldn't be lifts installed so they can.

Blindness is another affliction where you just have to accept your limitations. So is being hideously ugly. Get over it.
 
2002-10-22 02:02:22 AM  
[image from lavender.fortunecity.com too old to be available]
the ADA never stopped ME from getting laid!
 
2002-10-22 02:06:42 AM  
in your face, bobby!
[image from bobby.watchfire.com too old to be available]
 
2002-10-22 02:08:47 AM  
America Online provides Disabled Internet Services 24/7.
 
2002-10-22 02:26:35 AM  
As I see it...

No government should interfere. Here is a very big market. Web sites are, well, basically commands on demand.

The key(money maker) would be to be able to decifer the commands and make them audio(able)..

Like a prescription, government would then pay for a certain portion in some cases.

The lawsuit should be struck down. But someone could come in and start a competition.
 
2002-10-22 02:27:02 AM  
ADA - Americans (with) Disabilities act

sorta OK being disabled....just PISSES me off when physical locations dont make any kinda accomadations....like that thing a day or two ago about a guy sleeping being kicked outta that sporting event...if that was me i would had sued their ass til they turned blue, and sued them again--btw, got 2 sleeping disorders for anyone that wants to know...i know you all do!
 
2002-10-22 02:37:04 AM  
How exactly do you make a web site accessible to the blind?

You design it so that text readers can output the text in a logical fashion. I once ran across a website that showed the difference in text reader output between a site using invisible tables for layout and one that used divs. The div site content came across very clearly, but on the table site, the reader announced every time it hit a new cell, which mucked things up significantly. The Southwest site uses a bunch of tables - I wonder if that contributed to the blind guy's problem.

I do agree with the judge, though. Forcing accessibility guidelines onto the WWW would open up a very nasty can of worms. Besides, couldn't the guy have just called Southwest directly? I'm sure a phone rep would have been happy to help him.
 
2002-10-22 02:44:30 AM  
dear lord, poor southwest has to make a website for the blind... next they are going to want seats inside the plane.
 
2002-10-22 03:15:52 AM  
dear lord, poor southwest has to make a website for the blind... next they are going to want seats inside the plane.



What the hell? You think that all businesses should be forced to design websites to be accessible by blind people?! Do you have any idea how much that would cost in terms of development? Not to mention the layout would probably inconvenience the 99% or so of us who aren't blind. Nobody has a fundamental right to have a website accessible to them. If it's that much of a problem, they can biatch at the airlines, and refuse to do business with those companies that don't make their sites more blind-person-friendly. That, or they can get the hell over it, realize that they can't do everything most people can since they're blind, and just be thankful that speech synthesizers exist so they can read websites in the first place. You can just as easily order a ticket over the phone.



I guess you think libraries and book stores should be forced to offer audio versions of all their books, too, huh?
 
2002-10-22 03:17:24 AM  
If I told them I had a multiple personality disorder, would I have to buy another ticket?
If I made out with a girl with a multiple personality disorder, does that count as a threesome?
 
udo
2002-10-22 03:21:20 AM  
ADA - Americans (with) Disabilities act

sorta OK being disabled....just PISSES me off when physical locations dont make any kinda accomadations....like that thing a day or two ago about a guy sleeping being kicked outta that sporting event...if that was me i would had sued their ass til they turned blue, and sued them again--btw, got 2 sleeping disorders for anyone that wants to know...i know you all do!


People with sleeping disorders are not a protected class.
 
udo
2002-10-22 03:23:20 AM  
You design it so that text readers can output the text in a logical fashion. I once ran across a website that showed the difference in text reader output between a site using invisible tables for layout and one that used divs. The div site content came across very clearly, but on the table site, the reader announced every time it hit a new cell, which mucked things up significantly. The Southwest site uses a bunch of tables - I wonder if that contributed to the blind guy's problem.


Sounds like a problem with the text reader, not a problem with the website. Tables are quite common on the internet.
 
2002-10-22 03:32:04 AM  
Using tables as the main look and layout element is contrary to what tables are designed for. Grow a brain and use CSS. I know it's hard to actually try to learn a little HTML before passing yourself off as a "web designer", but it pays off in the long run.

Without reference to any particular person here, of course.
 
2002-10-22 07:01:39 AM  
I'm a wheelchair user and I side with the judge's ruling. Why should 99.99 percent of the population have to change for 00.01 percent. I hate PC so farking much.. Two groups with idiot activists are the blind and the deaf, they are always complaining! Making a building accessible is one thing[business for seniors-disabled], but making the internet totally "accessible" is a farking joke. Solution..either get your friend to read the webpage or simply get to fark off of it.
BTW I don't allow any activist to speak for me!
 
2002-10-22 07:52:56 AM  
Kill all the cripples!!! They take all the best parking spaces!... Seriously though, this is one of the few common sense rulings I have seen in a long time... The reason the ADA is in place is to support the disabled in a situation for which no other solution exists... Another solution exisists for the blind when ordering tickets.... It's called a telephone...
 
sos
2002-10-22 07:53:28 AM  
One of my projects in college was about making web sites accesible to the blind. The people I worked with were not interested in changing web sites totally, but rather adding a text alternative (sometimes you see a link at the top for a "text only" version), or just doing simple things so the blind readers of the site can at least understand what is going on... Simple things like adding "alt" text to images:
<img src="images/fark.jpg" alt="Fark.com"$gt; take nearly no extra effort at all, but can help blind readers know what that image is. If the alt text is not added, when the screen reader goes over it, it just says "image". If there are a lot of images like that, it can get very annoying, and if the links are all made up of images, it is impossible to navigate.

That being said, I agree with the judges decision. I think the guy in this case was interested in having Southwest redesign the entire site so he could more easily access it. The intent of the ADA is to make things accessible to the disabled, not to change everything to make it specially designed for them. He was still able to order tickets, and even if he couldn't do it on the web, he had other options to do it - the phone, a travel agent, or go to the airport and do it there. It's not like he had no way to order a ticket because the web site was hard to use.
 
sos
2002-10-22 07:54:49 AM  
That should have been <img src="images/fark.jpg" alt="Fark.com">
 
2002-10-22 08:15:19 AM  
Is it really that hard to make ALT tags?
Webmasters these days are just bloody idiots when it comes to designing functional websites, as long as they look pretty they generally dont care.
How many sites have you seen that use images where text is more than appropriate? Stuff like having a navigation bar with single words for links, with a 2k graphic per word, instad of 4 or 5 bytes of text.

Here in Australia, our government was smart enough to take the opposite view, at least for their own sites. All government sites must be accessible for the blind, which in most cases simply means sticking ALT tags on images.

And who says they have to completely re-design the site? How many sites have 'text only' versions? Not only does it make the site accessible to the blind, but it also saves people from downloading bucketloads of images slowing down the site loading in the first place.

Its not that hard, just need to educate web developers out of their point-and-drool mentality.
 
2002-10-22 08:27:13 AM  
Shades:

I am a 'web designer', alright, I'm actually a web programmer but I have to do some design too. This summer we completely rebuilt a major site for a large client. Originally we went in and did the whole site in div tags. It looked great and worked great...in about 3 different browsers with their latest versions. However, as we could tell from the log way too many of the users out there are still retarded and not capable of downloading the newest version of browser X. DIV tags aren't supported for shiat in most of the browsers people are still using ( think IE3.X ). We told the client to do everyone a favor and make their customers follow a link to download their choice of newer browser but we were denied, so we had to redo the majority of the site back into tables.

Should you use tables for layout, no, but a lot of the time you have to because lots of internet users are asshats who refuse to download any number of current free browsers.
 
sos
2002-10-22 08:52:18 AM  
I just checked out their site, and I would like to say that they could do a lot to improve basic accessibility, such as alt tags. They don't seem to have any, and that would be a very simple addition. Other than that, it seems to be fairly easy. It's not incredibly graphical, doesn't depend on scripts alone to do stuff, etc.

There is a tester called Bobby that checks for accessibility, and when I passed Southwest.com through it, it came up with a ton of problems. Check out the results here. I still agree with the judge, but I think Southwest should also do some basic stuff to improve the site.
 
2002-10-22 09:43:41 AM  
Two things:

1) Being a software developer I ask: Which screen reader was he using? What if the reader itself was crap? There's some shoddy low-end voice synthesizers out there.

2) Being a web designer: What does he have to say about this flash site? Haha. Flash's pretty cool to create and use, but I think awful in terms of accessibility support. It's not even Macromedia's fault. It's just the way it is designer. Vector graphics don't really have <div> tags.
 
2002-10-22 09:49:53 AM  
So, can I have those wasted hours of my life back that I spent trying to make a website I designed for the VA Hospital System compatable under ADA regs for all sorts of things? What a pain in my ass.
 
2002-10-22 11:21:26 AM  
Jumpin' Jesus, you people... It's not THAT hard making a web site screen reader capable. We're not talking about putting in a million dollar elevator because you have one disabled employee, we're talking about taking an extra five minutes to validate your HTML... Let's have some scope people...
 
2002-10-22 12:16:11 PM  
Well, the regs I had to deal with weren't all about web screen readers. That wasn't all that difficult. It was for a side research group affiliated with the VA and the VA had all sorts of regs and exceptions and rules and loopholes and approval processes and naming conventions and style points and on and on and on. Think the best of government bureaucracy. So, my beef really wasn't so much with the ADA regs, I just wanted to biatch.
 
2002-10-22 12:35:47 PM  
He can have his ADA on the internet once he STARTS PAYING HIS INCOME TAX! I mean, if the ADA makes it mandatory to make ones facilities as accessible to the blind, halt, and lame as everyone else, then the reason of the exemption is gone.
 
2002-10-22 12:37:54 PM  
I think an obvious solution is for the Government to force everyone to be blind. That way we'll all be equal under the law.
Lights Out!
 
2002-10-22 01:33:21 PM  
It's a pain to make some designs accessable (Flash-based, table-dependant) but for "typical" HTML sites it's not such a big deal... and it's a nice thing to do.

I know that doing something just because it's polite is an alien concept to some of you guys... so think of it this way... by making your site accessable you're increasing your potential audience/client-base/number of ad impressions by several million people.

Obviously there's not much point in making a boobies site accessable, but that's not what most of the blind surfers are going to be after...
 
2002-10-22 05:07:55 PM  
You know something? I'd side with the judge, were it not for one thing: namely, how absurdly simple it is to make a site accesible for the blind, without any need to make its layout "inconvenient" for anyone.

And here's where you start. Structural HTML for markup, then CSS for layout. You can do any layout with this combination that you could with tables, and you can do it more easily in all but a very few (exceedingly rare) cases. Give me one day and I could update Fark itself to such a layout, no sweat. The fact that we have some no-talents who remain stuck using outdated, harmful methods to lay out pages is a sign of everything that is wrong with this industry.

Wake up people. There's a better way. Time to start using it. And if the law's the only way to bring the Web back to what it was intended to be -a universal medium for the exchange of information- then so be it. If you're a user, you'll never notice anytthing ever changed. If you're a designer, it means a few new redesign projects (fixing what it was your responsibility to make right in the first place... oh, the horror!), but you'll find your work getting done better and faster.
 
Displayed 50 of 52 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report