[Chapter-delegates] on the importance of accessibility was: Map of Chapters

[Klaus Birkenbihl]

Narelle,

I'm copying a few people from staff with whom I discussed the issue
before. I think the problem deserves much more attention from the
organization. It is pending now for more than a year and there is
not much hope of improvement without an escalation. So if you and
Rudi please could bring it to the attention of the board? Topic
is accessibility of ISOC's Web page - here illustrated at the example
of http://www.internetsociety.org/find-chapter.

Narelle Clark wrote on 2013-02-15 03:58:
> My memory of this is that the map was thought to be the most attractive
> way of showing the strength of our chapters - the number and spread across
> the world.

Nothing against a map. But it should be implemented *accessible*. ISOC
tries to educate the world on the importance of accessibility while
obviously not providing it when it comes to its own side. E.g. we are
hiding the information on this page completely from blind people!
39 Million in the world don't get any information from this page:
We give them  无, nothing, rien, ничего, nada! Not a single name!
This is probably not "the most attractive way of showing the strength
of our chapters". (Other ISOC pages hide part of their content.)

Nearly nothing happened for more than a year now. The "find a
chapter" page was updated btw. Shininess improved (tons of code,
playing with fancy technologies, open layers, jquery extensions,
... you name it). But no progress wrt accessibility. It would be
so easy to make the information accessible. You simply would have
to provide a text version. Every student could do it. Shiny+accessible
might require a bit more effort and knowledge depending on
what you'd like to have - but a reasonable design will never
conflict with accessibility.

Which leads to the question "why?". From many discussions with Dan
Graham about this I learned: "we would like to increase accessibility
but the agency ..." , "we have a new agency now which will care ...",
...

A quote from

http://www.internetsociety.org/doc/internet-accessibility-internet-use-persons-disabilities-moving-forward:
"This paper offers policymakers guidance on both why and how to
increase use of the Internet by persons with disabilities." Do
we read what we write? Did ISOC provide the info to their Web
agency? Is it part of the contract?

Call it "lip prayers", "preaching water and drinking wine" ... at
the bottom line it affects our credibility. (You might remember
that we had the credibility discussion also in the context of
bylaws.)

I'm boring you? I said it before? There are more important (urgent,
promising ...) topics on the agenda?

Did anybody notice that our Website advertises 3 "Internet
Issues Spotlights"? One of them "Online Accessibility". Are we
rather part of the problem than part of the solution?

ISOC being financially healthy is in a good position to promote
the message of an Internet for all. ISOC gets attention when it
speaks-up on an issue. But -beside money and human resources-
credibility is one of our most important assets. So we should
take care to maintain it. A very basic thing like providing an
accessible Website is (also according to our own teaching the
world) important, easy to do and affordable. It is not a matter
of money, or resources. It is matter of priorities, management
attention and the way of thinking.

Best, Klaus

-- 
Klaus Birkenbihl
Treasurer and Board member
Internet Society German Chapter e.V. (ISOC.DE)
c/o ict-Media GmbH
http://www.isoc.de/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Klaus_Birkenbihl.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 293 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20130215/7f6367a7/attachment.vcf>