Data, Tools and Research
May 25 and 26, 1999
US Department of Commerce
Washington DC
THE GROWING DIGITAL DIVIDE
IN ACCESS FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES:
Cynthia D. Waddell, J.D.
![]() |
Office of Equality
Assurance City
Manager Department 801 North First Street,
Room 460 San Jose, California95110-1704 (408)277-4034 |277-3885
FAX
|
in the Digital Economy
IV.Disability
Rights Law and Policy Impacting Web Page Transactions and the Internet
Environment
This White Paper was
commissioned by the National Science Foundation to be presented on May
25, 1999 at the “Understanding the Digital Economy” conference; a public
conference convened in response to a directive from the President of the
United States to the National Economic Council, in consultation with executive
branch agencies.[1]
The conference is timely
because there are significant law and policy issues impacting the community
of people with disabilities in their ability to overcome digital barriers
and participate in the digital economy.The
growth and success of the emerging digital economy requires that attention
be paid to the mechanism for enabling dynamic participation.Unless
the civil rights of America’s 54 million[2]
people with disabilities are addressed during this period of rapid, technological
development, the community will be locked out from participation on the
basis of disability and the technological world will not be enriched by
their diverse contributions.
The impact is systemic
and reaches all sectors of our economy, whether or not the participant
is a consumer, business owner, employee, educator, student, parent, child
or citizen.Specific digital economy
barriers need to be addressed in our research in order to inform our civil
rights laws and public policy.As
a person with a disability responsible for local government compliance
with state and federal disability rights law, the author joins stakeholders
in seeking a smart process that engages both individual differences and
the collective community.[3]
This paper identifies
some of the emerging digital economy barriers, current efforts to address
these barriers and expresses the author’s vision of the long-term policy
research agenda.Because the benefits
for overcoming these barriers extend beyond the community of people with
disabilities, there are practical and significant business reasons for
addressing this issue.Rather than
creating a growing digital divide, emerging technology can enable full
participation in the digital economy for everyone, regardless of age, disability
or the limitations of the technology available.[4]
II.Multiple
Methods for Access Benefit Everyone
As we examine the civil
rights requirements for access and fairness, note the additional benefits
that accrue:by mainstreaming the
functionality found in the assistive computer arena into the architecture
of our digital economy, we will expand technological innovations and develop
creative solutions.By embracing
our individual differences, the collective community receives greater benefits
than that achieved through the segregation and isolation of people with
disabilities.
Because the digital
economy by definition requires a dynamic Internet environment, the very
functionality required by the disability community can satisfy this dynamic
requirement for web-based transactions.Accessible
web design enables dynamic web sites- whether or not it is for business
transactions, voting or long-distance learning.In
addition, many benefits are emerging in the application of accessible web
design.Accessible web design enables
CD and videotapes to be archived through captioning.Accessible
web design also enables electronic textbooks to be accessible.Even
illiterate populations can access the Internet by listening to screenreaders
audibly reading the web.
And lastly, web accessibility
enables low technology to access high technology.People
with slow modems and low bandwidth can access the electronic content of
the web.Even consumers without state
of the art computer equipment or who only have a telephone, can participate
in an accessible Internet environment using a telephone browser.
As Susan Brummel Turnbull
pointed out in her white paper, “People with Disabilities and the NII:
Breaking Down Barriers, Building Choice,[5]
the public interest for investing in the National Information Infrastructure
(NII) and people with disabilities is that it:
·Removes
communications and information access barriers that restrict business and
social interactions between people with and without disabilities
·Removes
age-related barriers to participation in society
·Reduces
language and literacy-related barriers to society
·Reduces
risk of information worker injuries and
·Enhances
global commerce opportunities.
III.Emerging Barriers in Web Page Transactions and the Internet Environment:The Problem
The more the marketplace
is transformed into a digital economy, the more obvious it is to the community
of people with disabilities that they cannot participate due to inaccessible
web design.[6]It
is true that on a case by case basis computer stations with assistive computer
technology can be tailored to the particular needs of people with disabilities.But
we have not fully addressed the linkage of the individual with the Internet
community as a whole. Rapid changes in the Internet environment require
that we examine not only the end-user workstation needs but also the technology
barriers emerging beyond the computer workstation.End-users
utilizing assistive computer technology cannot conduct web transactions
if the Internet environment does not accommodate the functionality needs
of accessible design.Unless this
problem is addressed, expenditures on infrastructure and technology accommodations
will be wasted if attention is not paid to the end-user locked out of the
Internet due to inaccessible design.
According to the National
Council on Disability[7],
computers and the Internet are used by a significant number of people with
disabilities in America.[8]But
because the Internet environment is inaccessible, it is difficult to count
the number of people with disabilities who would like to participate but
cannot because of the barriers to access.Counting
users on the Internet is like counting the number of people using wheelchairs
who are inside an inaccessible building.It
was once thought that since no wheelchair users were in the building, ramps
were not needed.
The transformation
of the Internet from a text-based medium to a robust multi-media environment
has created a crisis – a growing digital divide in access for people with
disabilities.Previously, people
with visual disabilities were able to access the Internet with their screen
readers audibly reading aloud the text on a web page.Today,
graphical web pages are a barrier if they do not incorporate accessible
web design.
This barrier is systemic
and must be addressed in our policies as well as in our education and outreach.In
their practical guide to the information economy for executives and policymakers,
Information Rules:A Strategic
Guide to the Network Economy, authors Shapiro and Varian point out
that “[t]oday more than 60 percent of Internet traffic is to Web Sites,
and of the Web traffic, almost three-fourths is images.”[9]
The problem for screen
readers is that inaccessible web page design either hides the text within
images, frames, applets or animated gifs or renders the text unintelligently
in table, columnar, or portable document format (pdf).Even
on-line forms are inaccessible especially when designed to prevent keyboard
navigation and input.Whether the
form is posted for school or event registration or on-line banking or shopping
transactions, people with visual and/or mobility disabilities are faced
with a significant barrier to participation.
But the impact is not
limited to people with visual and mobility disabilities.People
with specific learning disabilities are also finding that they can no longer
access web pages audibly with screen readers.Even
people with cognitive disabilities are becoming lost due to the absence
of navigation elements at web sites.Moreover,
people with hearing disabilities cannot access the content of audiostreaming
and videoclips posted on the Internet due to the absence of captioning.
The digital divide
in web page transactions and the Internet environment has bred a host of
additional problems for people with disabilities.For
example, commercial web-authoring applications lack access tool kits for
webmasters to correct accessible web design problems.In
fact, many current web-authoring tools on the market make it extremely
difficult to even design an accessible web page.The
scarcity of tools also contributes to the lack of education among programmers
and web authors on why and how to code an accessible web page.And
if the webmaster herself is a person with a disability, she will also find
a lack of web authoring applications that she can utilize.This
is especially true for webmasters with mobility disabilities requiring
voice, eye tracking or keyboard input/output features in web authoring
applications.
Whether the digital
barrier is the inaccessible design of Internet/Intranet web sites, Internet
Service Provider “portals,” incompatible browsers, or inaccessible web-based
platforms for on-line business, the trend is growing and must be addressed
at the infancy of the digital economy.Already,
exciting electronic and information technology features are emerging in
the areas of information appliances, real-time conference participation,
audio-streaming, telephone voice browsers, search engines, news groups,
chat rooms and 3-D imaging.Unless
functionality solutions for accessibility are addressed today, the state
of the digital divide tomorrow may be impossible to overcome.
IV. Disability
Rights Law and Policy Impacting Web Page Transactions and the Internet
Environment
Consider the comments
of Lawrence Lessig in his article on “Cyber-Governance”:
We
have no problem of governance in cyberspace.We
have a problem with governance.There
isn’t a special set of dilemmas that cyberspace will present; there are
just the familiar dilemmas that modern governance confronts- familiar problems
in a new place . . . . Cyberspace is that space constituted by code- by
software and hardware that together make up the architectures that cyberspace
is . . . . These architectures are many; the values that they imbed- privacy,
anonymity, access, control- are varied; and hence a choice about these
architectures is a choice about these values.Yet
we are at a time when we are strangely disabled from making choices about
these architectures.[10]
If it is true that
we are disabled from making smart choices about cyberspace architectures,
then inaccessible web design is certainly evidence of this problem.Yet,
the evolution of our disability rights laws have resulted in the understanding
that access to information and communication is a civil right for people
with disabilities.Some of the current
federal statutes and their implementing regulations that protect this civil
right include:
1.Section
504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973[11]
2.Section
508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973[12]
3.Rehabilitation
Act Amendments of 1986[13]
4.Technology-Related
Assistance for Individuals with
Disabilities
Act of 1988 (Tech Act)[14]
5.Americans
with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA)[15]
6.Education
of the Handicapped Act Amendments of 1990[16]
7.Education
for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975
(EAHCA)[17]
8.Handicapped
Infants and Toddlers Act[18]
9.Telecommunications
Act of 1996[19]
10.Section
121 of the U.S. Copyright Law[20]
11.Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act[21]
Although each of these
statutes, their amendments and regulations deserve an extended discussion
as to the civil right protections impacting electronic and information
technology, this paper is limited to highlighting some of the significant
legal issues that can inform our policy impacting people with disabilities.
ADA Legal Challenges
First, as of this writing there have been no legal challenges under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) on the issue of inaccessible web pages and the Internet environment.Nevertheless, attention is being paid to the application of the ADA to inaccessible web design because of the scope and impact of this statute protecting people with disabilities from discrimination in their access to employment and commerce.
As discussed below, the ADA requirements for “effective communication” and the provision of “auxiliary aids and services” and “reasonable accommodations” apply to the computer and Internet environment.Because of the ongoing duty to remove barriers, it is not enough to respond on an ad-hoc basis to individual requests for accommodation.There is an affirmative duty to develop a comprehensive policy involving input from the community of people with disabilities.New technology must either improve accessibility or ensure compatibility with existing access design functions.In addition, the ADA also provides for a “new generation of civil rights laws in which Congress assigned Federal agencies not only the duty to enforce, but also to inform all parties (persons with disabilities and covered entities) of their responsibilities and rights under the law.”[22]
Nevertheless, as discussed in this author’s article “Applying the ADA to the Internet:A Web Accessibility Standard,”[23] the U.S. Department of Justice (USDOJ) has issued only one policy ruling letter concerning web site accessibility dated September 9, 1996 (hereinafter USDOJ Letter).[24]In fact, the USDOJ has been faulted for failing to provide proactive guidance on web site accessibility.[25]But the USDOJ Letter does reiterate the ADA requirement that covered entities must furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to ensure effective communication with individuals with disabilities, unless doing so would result in a fundamental alteration to the program or service or in an undue burden.[26]
Under the rationale
of “effective communication,” the USDOJ Letter states that ADA Titles II
and III require state and local governments and the business sector to
provide effective communication whenever they communicate through the Internet.The
effective communication rule applies to covered entities using the Internet
for communication regarding their programs, goods or services since they
must be prepared to offer those communications via an accessible medium.
Specifically addressing
the needs of people with visual disabilities, the USDOJ Letter points out
that providing a text format rather than a graphical format assures accessibility
to the Internet for individuals using screenreaders.Without
special coding a text browser will only display the word “image” when it
reads a graphic image.Moreover,
if the graphic is essential to navigating the site (such as a navigational
button or arrow) or if it imparts vital information (such as a table or
image map) the user can get stuck and not be able to move or understand
the information provided.
Legal challenges are
anticipated[27]
amid the growing avalanche of ADA administrative complaint filings that
have yet to reach the courts. In fact, a number of web site complaints
have quietly settled with the covered entities promising to retrofit their
web sites for accessible design.Examples
of the types of ADA complaints anticipated include:employees
requiring accessible intranet/internet environment as a reasonable accommodation
under ADA Title I; employees and students requiring access to long-distance
learning courses; citizens requiring access to internet kiosks for voting
or participating in business or governmental transactions; or consumers
requiring access to electronic textbooks and the web-based environment.
The definition
of electronic and information technology under Section 508 includes: computers,
hardware, software, web pages, facsimile machines, copiers, telephones
and other equipment used for transmitting, receiving, using or storing
information.[31]It
is expected that by February 7, 2000 the Architectural and Transportation
Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board) will issue standards that will
define what is meant by electronic and information technology and will
set forth the technical and functional performance criteria for accessibility
implementation.[32]
Access to the learning
environment is a critical, front-line issue requiring an immediate resolution.For
example, library reference services are being transformed by the efficiency
of Internet access to information systems and search engines.Professors
are teaching long-distance learning courses over the Internet and even
if a student is physically in class, homework assignments and resources
are being posted on classroom web pages.Yet,
even if a library terminal has assistive computer technology installed
for students or visitors with disabilities, Internet research is not possible
with inaccessible web page design.
The following is a
summary of four selected California OCR Letters of Resolution impacting
Internet accessibility:
1.OCR
Letter Docket No. 09-95-2206 (January 25, 1996):Student
complaint that a university failed to provide equivalent access to the
Internet.Student with a visual disability
was required to make appointments with personal reader attendants as the
exclusive mechanism for access to the Internet.The
University also failed to complete the “Self-Evaluation Plan” as required
by ADA Title II.According to the
finding:
The
issue is not whether the student with the disability is merely provided
access, but the issue is rather the extent to which the communication is
actually as effective as that provided to others.Title
II [of the ADA] also strongly affirms the important role that computer
technology is expected to play as an auxiliary aid by which communication
is made effective for persons with disabilities.OCR
notes that the “information superhighway” is fast becoming a fundamental
tool in post-secondary research.[33]
2.OCR
Letter Docket No. 09-97-2002 (April 7, 1997):Student
complaint that a university failed to provide access to library resources,
campus publications, open computer laboratories, training on adaptive computer
technology and computer test-taking.According
to the finding:
Title
II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Title II) requires a public
college to take appropriate steps to ensure that communications with persons
with disabilities “are as effective as communications with others” [28
C.F.R. § 35.160(a)].OCR has
repeatedly held that the term “communication” in this context means the
transfer of information, including (but not limited to) the verbal presentation
of a lecturer, the printed text of a book, and the resources of the Internet.Title
II further states that, in determining what type of auxiliary aid and service
is necessary, a public college shall give primary consideration to the
requests of the individual with a disability [28 C.F.R. § 35.160(b)(2)].[34]
In further clarifying
what is meant by “effective communication,” OCR held that the three basic
components of effective communication are:“timeliness
of delivery, accuracy of the translation, and provision in a manner and
medium appropriate to the significance of the message and the abilities
of the individual with the disability.”[35]
OCR also points out
that the courts have held that a public entity violates its obligations
under the ADA when it only responds on an ad-hoc basis to individual requests
for accommodation.There is an affirmative
duty to develop a comprehensive policy in advance of any request for auxiliary
aids or services. See Tyler v. City of Manhattan, 857 F. Supp. 800
(D.Kan. 1994)[36]Moreover,
according to OCR “[a] recognized good practice in establishing such a comprehensive
policy is to consult with the disability community, especially those members
most likely to request accommodations.”[37]
Of particular interest
is the analogy OCR draws between the rationale for bringing an existing
building up to code for access and the purchase of new technology for information
systems.For example, buildings built
prior to access laws are governed by “program access” requirements and
remodeling triggers the requirement to install certain accessible architectural
features.
Similarly, the effective
communication requirement according to OCR imposes a duty to solve barriers
to information access that the entity’s purchasing choices create.Whenever
existing technology is “upgraded” by a new technology feature, it is important
to ensure that the new technology either improves accessibility or is compatible
with existing assistive computer technology.[38]For
example, web-authoring software programs that erect barriers in their coding
of web pages fall under this scrutiny.
Lastly, OCR states
that when an entity selects software programs and/or hardware equipment
not adaptable for people with disabilities, “the subsequent substantial
expense of providing access is not generally regarded as an undue burden
when such cost could have been significantly reduced by considering the
issue of accessibility at the time of the initial selection.”[39]Therefore
all technology improvements must take into account the removal of barriers
and ensure that new barriers to access do not occur.Covered
entities preparing to retrofit their web sites need to be aware of this
requirement.
3.OCR
Letter Docket No. 09-97-6001 (January 22, 1998):OCR
Statewide compliance review under Title II of the ADA and Section 504 of
the Rehabilitation Act.The purpose
of the review and subsequent OCR Report was to assess how 106 California
Community Colleges meet their obligations to students with visual disabilities
in providing access to print and electronic information. In OCR’s letter
dated January 22, 1998,[40]
the comprehensive review suggested nine strategies to address:
·Cost-effective
approach to purchasing adaptive technology
·Adaptive
technology training
·Access
guidelines for distance learning and campus web pages as well as tools
for training faculty and staff
·Inclusive
language in the distribution of standard technology grants/funds addressing
college responsibility to ensure technology access and compatible upgrades
·Print
materials translated into alternate formats such as electronic text and
Braille
·Central
registry of textbooks in alternative formats
·Library
technology initiatives for access to both students and patrons with disabilities
·Follow-up
to OCR survey initiated in 9/18/96 to determine compliance progress
·Annual
reviews of Disabled Student Programs and Services to include attention
to the removal of barriers in electronic technology
The Community College
Chancellor has agreed to implement OCR’s recommendations to help the colleges
meet their obligations under the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act.[41]Whereas
the assistive computer technology training, support and services for students
with disabilities was once limited to staff exclusively working with the
Office of Disabled Student Programs, a systemic plan is now required for
mainstreaming this knowledge campus-wide:
“Technology
access, like architectural access, must be addressed institutionally as
an integral part of the planning process.” [42]
Just as the removal
of architectural barriers requires a plan for implementation, the removal
of technological or digital barriers in programs and services requires
a comprehensive institutional plan impacting every campus office.
4.OCR
Letter Docket No. 09-99-2041 (April 20, 1999):Student
complaint that the university failed to provide access to the College of
Business curriculum and other educational programs, including computer
laboratories and classes in the College of Business.OCR
noted that although the academic community has heavily relied upon centralized
units on campus to house and maintain assistive computer technology:
[S]uch
sole reliance upon a single centralized location (when not limited to adaptive
technology training, but instead used for instructing disabled students
in course subject matter) may run counter to the strong philosophy embodied
in Title II and Section 504 regarding the importance of fully integrating
students with disabilities into the mainstream educational program, unless
such services cannot be otherwise effectively provided [see 34 C.F.R. §
104.4(b)(iv); 28 C.F.R. § 35.130(b)(iv)] .Thus,
OCR assumes in most cases computer access will be effectively provided
to the student with the disability in an educational setting with his or
her nondisabled peers and classmates at the various computer laboratory
sites scattered throughout the campus.[43]
As a result, the mainstreaming
of students with disabilities has created the need for appropriate technology
tools for access to the learning environment.And
as students with disabilities move into the workforce as employees, employers
or consumers, accessible web design and an accessible internet platform
remains a significant issue to be addressed in the digital economy.In
other words, overcoming barriers in the digital economy requires appropriate
policies, technology tools and education for accessible system design and
implementation.
We have seen how people
with disabilities are locked out of the digital economy web environment
due to the lack of accessible design. The digital divide will continue
to expand if this issue is not addressed in our research, education and
outreach.As the rapid development
of new web applications continues, it is necessary to ensure that new barriers
are not erected to effective communication and commerce.
This section briefly
highlights some of the additional problems currently expanding the digital
divide:Internet Services Providers,
Internet voting, accessible system design, Internet kiosks, smart cards,
electronic textbooks, long-distance learning, and consumer household appliances.
Even if a vendor has
a package with built-in accessibility features, it is important that people
with disabilities are involved in the development of the product as well
as in the procurement of the product.By
including this knowledge on the team, system planning can anticipate and
address compatibility, accessibility and implementation issues. Examples
of some of the problematic issues include:the
transfer of human resources/payroll/product inventory databases to particular
intranet environment formats not friendly to screenreader access or keyboard
navigation; the intranet ‘upgrade’ to database search engine capability
when the search engine itself is not accessible to screenreaders; or the
inaccessible design of a web-based vendor platform for conducting on-line
business.Research is needed on how
to best incorporate difference and choice to address this growing problem.The
author has received numerous calls from state and business entities across
the nation seeking solutions after a system upgrade “bumped” an employee
from the workplace.
Smart Cards
Smart cards, whether they are in the shape of credit cards, keys or rings, or demand vision to access digital displays of random password entry numbers for operation, require accessible design considerations.As businesses and governmental agencies increase their investment in these products for security or employee identification reasons, the number of consumers and employees impacted by the lack of accessible design will increase.Solutions are needed to address this problem.
Electronic Textbooks
Currently the State
of Texas Education Code[45]
requires the Texas Education Agency to develop a study project to determine
the costs and benefits of using computer networks, including the Internet
in public schools.The issues to
be studied include electronic delivery of textbooks and supplement updates
as well as the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of producing electronic
textbooks for students with disabilities.
·Require
that all materials purchased by Texas public schools for preparing students
to take standardized and college entrance examinations be accessible to
students with disabilities.
Likewise, in the State of California, Assembly Bill 422[48] requires publishers of textbooks and instructional materials to provide an electronic version for people with disabilities if the material is required as part of a course or study in a community college, the California State University or the University of California.A second bill, Assembly Bill 609[49], addresses the needs of grades kindergarten through twelve and includes the requirement that publishers of instructional materials provide the state, at no cost, computer files or electronic versions of the instructional material.Lastly, a third bill, Assembly Bill 395[50], provides conformity with the IDEA for special education programs and requires publishers and manufacturers to provide instructional materials to the state in electronic format compatible with Braille translation and speech synthesis software.
The efforts in Texas and California are timely and if successful, then another barrier in the digital divide will fall.
Long Distance Learning
The growth of the Internet
has created virtual universities and on-line courses that have not been
designed to allow people with disabilities to participate.Whether
or not these on-line courses are being taken by students or by employees,
inaccessible design is a barrier.As
mentioned earlier, the January 22, 1998 California Community OCR Findings
identified this problem:
California Community Colleges, individually and collectively as part of the California Virtual University, are rapidly developing their capacity to deliver educational programs to offsite students through technology.Little attention is being given to ensure that these distance learning programs are accessible to students with disabilities, especially students with visual impairments.[51]
The California Community
Colleges currently have an enrollment of 4.1 million students and have
responded by establishing a Distance Education Accessibility Work Group
to develop Distance Education Accessibility Guidelines.The
draft guidelines are currently under review by a variety of groups within
the system including the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges,
the general Distance Education Technology Advisory Committee, the Distance
Education Accessibility Work Group, DSPS Regional Coordinators, and the
High Tech Center Training Unit Advisory Committee.It
is expected that once feedback is received and incorporated, the Chancellor
of the California Community Colleges will issue final guidelines.[52]
As of the writing of
this paper, the California Community College long distance learning guidelines
will require all newly developed or acquired distance education curricula
and instructional materials to be accessible for people with disabilities.In
addition, as part of the six year curriculum review cycle for accreditation,
all existing curricula and instructional materials are to be reviewed and
revised, if necessary, to provide accessibility.[53]
VI.Emerging
Solutions to Overcoming the Digital Divide
By June 1996, the City
of San Jose Web Page Disability Access Design Standard was developed in
response to the monitoring of ADA Internet complaints and the need to incorporate
City ADA implementation policies.[54]By
integrating the requirements of the ADA and applying Universal designprinciples,
we have ensured the widest public access to City electronic government
information and services.[55]Currently
these standards are being incorporated into our web site and are subject
to change as technology advances to solve digital barriers and integrate
access tool kits in web-authoring tools.
Just as curbcuts enable
people using wheelchairs to navigate our City streets, “electronic curbcuts”[56]
enable people with disabilities to navigate the digital economy. There
are seven basic requirements in the City of San Jose minimum accessible
web design standard:[57]
1.Provide
an Access Instruction Page for Visitors (includes email hyperlink for visitors
to communicate problems with web page accessibility)[58]
2.Provide
support for text browsers[59]
3.Attach
“Alt” tags to graphic images so that screenreaders can identify the graphic[60]
4.Hyperlink
photographs with descriptive text “D”[61]
5.Caption
all audio and video clips by using “CC” hyperlinks[62]
6.Provide
alternative mechanism for on-line forms (such as email or voice/TTY phone
numbers)[63]
7.Avoid
access barriers such as the posting of documents in PDF, table, newspaper
or frame format or requiring visitors to download software.If
posting in PDF, the HTML text or ASCII file must also be posted.[64]
As a result of our
web accessibility effort,[65]
the City of San Jose was awarded the League of California Cities Helen
Putnam Grand Prize for Excellence[66]
as well as recognition as a “best practices” model by the United States
General Services Administration Center for Information Technology Accommodation.[67]The
author’s effort also led to being named to the “Top 25 Women on the Web”
by Webgrrls International.[68]
World Wide Web Consortium
Web Accessibility Initiative
On May 5, 1999 the
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) announced the release of the "Web Content
Accessibility Guidelines 1.0"[69]
specification as a W3C Recommendation.This
significant development provides a stable specification that has been reviewed
and recommended by the W3C Membership as a tool for making web sites accessible.As
Tim Berners-Lee, W3C Director and inventor of the World Wide Web aptly
states:“The power of the Web is
in its universality.Access by everyone
regardless of disability is an essential aspect.”[70]
The W3C Recommendation
is evidence of the W3C commitment to lead the way to full participation
on the Web for everyone and is an important step since the launch of the
Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) April 1997 in the County of Santa Clara,
California.[71]
The W3C Web Accessibility
Initiative (WAI) recognizes the problem of barriers on the Web for people
with disabilities and is committed to pursuing solutions through five primary
activities:
·Ensuring
that Web technologies support accessibility
·Developing
guidelines for accessibility
·Developing
tools to evaluate and facilitate accessibility
·Conducting
education and outreach
·Monitoring
and engaging in research and development[72]
The WAI technical activity
addresses technology, guidelines and tools coordinated through the International
Program Office.For example, in the
technology arena, WAI has identified the following areas for accessibility
needs:HTML, Style Sheets, Multimedia,
MathML, DOM, XML, Graphics, Mobile Access, Internationalization.Currently
there is a Protocols and Formats Working Group as well as an HTML/CSS Review
Working Group.[73]
In the area of web
accessibility guidelines critical for web site development and web application
development, the WAI is coordinating page authoring guidelines[74]
for accessible web sites; user agent guidelines,[75]
such as browsers and multimedia players; and authoring tool guidelines,[76]
such as editors and site management tools.Currently
there is a Web Content Guidelines Working Group, a User Agent Guidelines
Working Group and an Authoring Tools Guidelines Working Group.[77]
Lastly, in the area
of tools to facilitate web accessibility, the WAI is coordinating an effort
to develop tools for evaluation, repair and proxy conversions.Currently
there is an Evaluation and Repair Interest Group and an Evaluation and
Repair Working Group.[78]
The WAI International
Program Office focuses on education and outreach and is separately funded
by W3C Member activities, governments and corporations.For
example, sponsors include the U.S. National Science Foundation, U.S. Department
of Education National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research,
European Commission’s TIDE Programme under Directorate Generale XIII, Microsoft
Corporation, IBM, Lotus Development Corporation and NCR.[79]
As stated
in a recent report by the President’s Information Technology Advisory Committee:
As
we have the opportunity to use information technology to strengthen our
societal institutions, we must understand the potential pitfalls, and the
safeguards we must put in place to achieve both a free and fair flow of
information.[80]
Overcoming
the digital divide for people with disabilities requires a “free and fair
flow of information” safeguarded by civil rights.Civil
rights principles should guide policymakers in the application of technology
in the emerging digital economy.Although
information technology changes; civil rights principles do not.[81]
Already our
civil rights statutes require government to consult the community of people
with disabilities whenever policies, services or programs impact their
community. There has also been a significant shift to include people with
disabilities in the design, research and development of assistive technology.[82]
In More
Than Screen Deep:Toward Every-Citizen
Interfaces to the Nation’s Information Infrastructure,[83]
three recommendations are offered for federal research that are supported
by the author of this White Paper:
1.Break
away from 1960s technologies and paradigms with a research agenda acknowledging
that the “human-machine interface is more than screen deep and should consider
every aspect of a person’s experience in using computing and communications.”[84]
2.Invest
in the research required to provide the component subsystems needed for
every-citizen interfaces with the highest priority being the determination
of citizens’ needs.[85]
3.Encourage
research on systems-level design and development of human-machine interfaces
that support multiperson, multimachine groups as well as individuals.[86]
In addition, overcoming
the digital divide also requires collaboration in open source technologies[87]
because civil rights principles reinforce the greater value of the functionality
returned through the collaboration.[88]Yet,
according to Shapiro and Varian, there is the problem that
Open
standards are prone to “splintering,” or “fragmentation.”Splintering
of a standard refers to the emergence of multiple, incompatible versions
of a standardized technology. . . .Open standards can also be “hijacked”
by companies seeking to extend them in proprietary directions, and thus
in time gain control over the installed base.Microsoft
has been accused of trying to extend both Java and HTML in proprietary
directions.[89]
Perhaps research is
needed on how to best manage open standards where civil right protections
are afforded the community of people with disabilities in their access
to technology.As suggested by O’Reilly,
an area for future study is “where the ideal boundary ought to be between
a core product controlled by a single individual or small team, and the
input of the user community.”[90]
Lastly, civil rights
principles should guide researchers as the federal government addresses
the ten critical “National Challenge Transformations” identified by the
President’s Information Technology Advisory Committee:
These
information technology transformations will affect how we communicate,[91]
how we store and access information,[92]
how we become healthier and receive proper medical care,[93]
how we learn,[94]
how we conduct business,[95]
how we work,[96]
how we design and build things,[97]
how we conduct research,[98]
how we sustain a livable environment,[99]
and how we manage our government in the next millennium.[100]
As our national research
agenda addresses these critical issues, this White Paper calls for fairness
and equity and echoes the view of the National Council on Disability[101]
that
If
equal access to multimedia for people with disabilities is to become a
reality, knowledge and awareness will have to be developed across all areas.[102]
A robust and strong
digital economy requires the removal of barriers through the deployment
of accessible design elements in our computer, information technology and
communications.By directing our
research and policy directives to address these problems, we will overcome
the digital divide and ensure full participation in the global digital
economy.