ADA Compliance And no kidding, getting sued over it

[g2ktcf]

I went and put in my site on the Wave analyzer. I got all kinds of hits for unordered lists. Are these not allowed?

[dbltoe]

Without seeing your site, I can't be specific but, bullets are often used when they are not really needed.

Check ppit the info at https://webaim.org/techniques/semanticstructure/

[dbltoe]

We may need a decision from the moderators before continuing with this thread.

While I don't mind assisting, many of the ADA/WCAG things that will come up are due to site manipulation rather than something done by Zen Cart itself.

That could make for a lot of forum time taken up by technically non-forum topics.

Most all testing tools will give you more information about something they find. Such is the case of lists by WebAIM. Wander around a bit in Wave and you will find links to information.

[mc12345678]

We may need a decision from the moderators before continuing with this thread.

While I don't mind assisting, many of the ADA/WCAG things that will come up are due to site manipulation rather than something done by Zen Cart itself.

That could make for a lot of forum time taken up by technically non-forum topics.

Most all testing tools will give you more information about something they find. Such is the case of lists by WebAIM. Wander around a bit in Wave and you will find links to information.

I'm not one of those, but I would think that as long as the conversation remains on topic that the particular thread could continue. If not on topic, start a new thread... Yes while some things are "site manipulation" related, there is application to the Zen Cart software. Too may be other websites that offer an improved location to converse about the topic... Just my 2 cents.

[g2ktcf]

I'm not one of those, but I would think that as long as the conversation remains on topic that the particular thread could continue. If not on topic, start a new thread... Yes while some things are "site manipulation" related, there is application to the Zen Cart software. Too may be other websites that offer an improved location to converse about the topic... Just my 2 cents.

I agree with this. An understanding of what is required will make a difference in how users choose to implement ZC. I am very concerned with how the requirements affect the design of my site. We all work very hard to make sites easy on the eyes and I see having to sacrifice some of that eye catching "stuff" to comply.

...and I cannot afford to get sued....

[carlwhat]

ok, i lied... i am making another post on this thread....

Plus, if you build a compliant template, why not use it first? Why test fate? If it's the color scheme, you can always get close by establishing your colors and then finding their contrasts. Googling contrasting color wheel will get you several online tools to help.

another statement with which i completely disagree.

making a site accessible for those with disabilities is the goal. but forcing everyone to use high contrast or non-seizure colors? is that even possible? is it not conceivable that using a color scheme for an individual with one disability is in direct violation of another individuals disability?

ADA has always forced companies to make their workplaces accessible for individuals with disabilities. that does NOT mean no stairs and ONLY wheelchair ramps. or all commodes must be ADA compliant. ADA compliant is there to serve a particular group of individuals. it is not there to force everyone to use the same tools as those people with disabilities.

I agree with this. An understanding of what is required will make a difference in how users choose to implement ZC. I am very concerned with how the requirements affect the design of my site. We all work very hard to make sites easy on the eyes and I see having to sacrifice some of that eye catching "stuff" to comply.

...and I cannot afford to get sued....

i hope i have answered your question. i'm a fan of great design. i'm a fan of accessibility for individuals with disabilities. i am NOT a fan of lawsuits. accessibe does allow for customization of one's viewing experience (similar to a new template) that does not force you into a design with which you are unhappy.

best.

[g2ktcf]

?

ADA has always forced companies to make their workplaces accessible for individuals with disabilities. that does NOT mean no stairs and ONLY wheelchair ramps. or all commodes must be ADA compliant. ADA compliant is there to serve a particular group of individuals. it is not there to force everyone to use the same tools as those people with disabilities.

And this is why I think this is a valid ZC subject. There are many differing opinions and we will see things change and shift as more information become available. But I clearly see this "accessible" version being an "user selected fully compliant template" that could be activated with both the mouse and keyboard commands.

[keneso]

Interesting thread.

IMHO the biggest issue is the "get rich soon" scheme, the decadence of our current society.

I would expect all those people suing the small businesses have visited some of the big ones as well, yet have not heard of class actions, maybe because it's easier to go after the small ones ... who knows ...

You just can't please everyone, we (society - lawmakers) should try to find a right balance which I really fail to see here; fully agree in assisting the less fortunate (then who knows it's our "normal" people bias), but this should not overly penalize the others.

What is next a law imposing to have all languages on a site, or restaurants to have all world menus?
If I don't like a place I go to another, no need to sue.

As a business/website owner it is me who should decide what services, and how to provide it, if someone is smarter than me, and provides that given service to target a specific niche good for him, I should not be penalized for not providing it; the beauty of free enterprise, and competition is just that.

ADA should be a reccomendation, not a law, and it should be my sensibility to make everyone welcome, and at ease, maybe instead of enforcing they should educate.

[dbltoe]

making a site accessible for those with disabilities is the goal. but forcing everyone to use high contrast or non-seizure colors? is that even possible? is it not conceivable that using a color scheme for an individual with one disability is in direct violation of another individuals disability?

And this is why I am concerned about this thread turning into another Hatfields and McCoys like "Friendly URLs."

Neither ADA or WCAG is even suggesting that a website be created for a person with disablitlies. Especially in contrast. There's no way we can provide for the four red-green, two blue-yellow, or the total non-recognition of color that folks with color blindness might explore.

I am NOT saying you need the contrast of black/white (21:1) throughout a site to meet standards. Contrast only need be 4.5:1 to meet AA standards and (my opinion) avoid a lawsuit. Optimum is 7.5:1 but, still, that in no way prevents you from being able to closely match one's color scheme.

AFTER the requirements and guidelines of ADA/WCAG are met you are ONLY making the site fully operational for the 80% of the population that has some disability when surfing the internet. Neiher is asking for you to make the site presentalbe for someone with Deuteranomalous color blindness (the most common.) The benefit of meeting ADA/WCAG standards is it ALSO makes it easier for a tool (such as though mentioned above) to help the other 20% of the population that needs extra help on a website. The blind individual using a reader HAS to have the proper basis of aria tags, alt tags, keyboard operation, in order for their reader to work. The color blind individual finds it still difficult to view a site without the tool they use finding a proper contrast built into the website as a basis for their tools.

[dbltoe]

AFTER the requirements and guidelines of ADA/WCAG are met you are ONLY making the site fully operational for the 80% of the population that has some disability when surfing the internet.

Sorry for the confusion of too many late nights. That should read

AFTER the requirements and guidelines of ADA/WCAG are met you are ONLY making the site fully operational for the 80% of the population that has no disability when surfing the internet.