Amen, and studies show that when sighted users go to sites that are W3C compliant sites, they like them better. Screen user manufactures continue to try to keep up with things
and blind users continue to shell out more money for these products, but the websites must do their part. We’re talking 1s and 0s not the expensive brick and morter solutions that are already accepted practice. We’re humans, we’re equal and we’re in the marketplace, the job market and the educational system. It’s a digital world nowadays, and to fail to make web sites and other digital interfaces accessible is massively harmful discrimination.

Maybe check out the mission of the national library service? As far as I know every state has a library for the blind and physically handicapped. It’s a lending library that specializes in recorded, braille and large print books/magazines/sheet music. They’ve gone digital but because of the “specialized format” required in the law they can’t just let you download a daisy format book even though that is one of the reasons for daisy in the first place. So you either get a reader from the library or buy your own (I bought mine, it’s lots smaller and much more advanced), but it works out in the end. Is everything recorded? Nope, resource limitations. But between that, ebooks that are accessible (not all are) and services like bookshare I get by.
As for tv/movies, check out described video service. Some libraries lend them and you can actually buy your own! 😀

It is not going to “interfere with people’s ability to use websites” that the baseline content be restricted to a flat text file with HTML 1.0 coding.

“I am not suggesting that disabled people solve it themselves.”

That is exactly what you are suggesting when you say that “user end solutions” exist.

“What you are saying is equivalent to saying that all stores must make their signs bigger so nearsighted and farsighted people can get by without glasses or contacts.”

Signage standards are part of the ADA.

“Second, there is no established practice when it comes to the ADA and websites.”

There was no established ADA practice for anything prior to the ADA, so I don’t know what you’re objecting to. If it’s decided that it applies to websites, then standards will be developed.

If so, why is a book not a public accommodation?

A television set?
If so, why did the legislature not mention these last two things in the law(they were invented and in common use at the time the law was written).
Easy answer: they were not considered public accommodations, and were not subject to state Human Rights Law.
This seems to be a classic case of mission creep, by litigation or regulation.

Accessibility is content neutral. I’ve got a b.s. in computer science and i’ve been programming since it was bitnet and arpanet… W3C sets the standard of what is html and what web servers and clients should do given certain tags in code. So yes, it’s voluntary much like ansi or the metric system, etc are “voluntary”.
As for accessibility degrading the experience for “normal” folks, go buy a clue. Visual medium? So he takes a picture of his posts and puts up a picture that takes up ten – fifty times the bandwidth each time/? Nope, he posts nice, accessible, readable text. That permits a screen reader to convert it to speech, someone who sees but not so good to blow it up as large as they need it, etc… And that hurts your experience here how? Maybe even visit the w3c site and see what their accessibility standards consist of, what tools they have for measuring accessibility and generally educate yourself. I have fed a wife and children turning out code, what is your qualification?
Is it perfect? No. Do I advocate lawsuits for sites that prefer not to have my business? No. Do I make statements on the law? No, not my department except what impact it has on me personally…

DensityDuck,

You are missing my point. I am not saying that it’s easy or cheap for bricks and mortar businesses. At least with physical meat space businesses all those design elements don’t interfere with normal people’s ability to use the space/business.

This is not likely to be the case with websites.

“I am not trying to defend the ADA. I’m explaining why your “just let the disabled people solve it themselves” is not in accordance with established practice.”

First, I am not suggesting that disabled people solve it themselves. There are established user end solutions that have been built by professionals.

What you are saying is equivalent to saying that all stores must make their signs bigger so nearsighted and farsighted people can get by without glasses or contacts.

Second, there is no established practice when it comes to the ADA and websites. In fact the very notion of applying the ADA to websites is as you say not in accordance with established practice.

“With a physical business, accessibility measures have a most a negligible effect on normal peoples ability to access the business.”

Really? Places already have significant requirements for architecture that result from ADA compliance. Hallway width, door placement and size and type, architectural features (read up on Hollister Clothing, or maybe the Squeeze Inn, or what about Chile Lindo?)

I am not trying to defend the ADA. I’m explaining why your “just let the disabled people solve it themselves” is not in accordance with established practice.

Cecil,

The W3C is a voluntary organization. It if free to set standards, but it people are free to ignore those standards within sites.

By making sites comply with some sort of standards, the rest of the world will pay for it. Websites will have to have larger amounts of code to comply if the ADA “requirement” is passed onto the sites. I am not sure how many sites are accessed by users on a daily basis, but even small increases in the code can have huge effects. I believe MattS is right in that the better solution is to have end user programs / apps and push for sites to comply with the W3C standards.

What will be interesting is that if Apple wins its appeal and case against the FBI on the theory that code is a form of free speech, does the government have the ability to demand that code for websites “say” or “express” something the government demands?

“There is no magic in programming, only blood sweat and tears.”

There are also trade offs. No software, no website can be all things for all people.

The internet is a primarily visual medium. No law will ever be able to change that.