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

[Narelle Clark]

Great news Dan.

Narelle

On Fri, February 15, 2013 11:22 pm, Dan Graham wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Accessibility is a top priority for us. We ran two audits last year and
> are now in the process of implementing changes to the site. I'll be able
> to provide Chapters and staff with a plan that outlines the key milestones
> and timing by the end of February.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Dan
>
>
>
> On Feb 15, 2013, at 1:13 PM, Narelle Clark wrote:
>
>> Hi Klaus
>>
>> believe me, I understand the need for accessibility of our web site.
>>
>> Indeed I ran a checker over www.isoc.org a month or so ago, and it
>> showed
>> quite a few issues. Missing alt tags, urls with 'click here' rather than
>> something informative... I used a demo version of
>> http://www.accessiq.org/
>> but I haven't got the report back from them unfortunately.
>>
>> It does add some extra time to make a site accessible, but it pays off!
>>
>> I believe we can put this as a policy directive from the board - it is a
>> strategic issue.
>>
>> The next board meeting is on April 11. I'll get it onto the agenda.
>>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>
>> Narelle
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> Narelle Clark
>> President
>> Internet Society of Australia
>> ph: 0412 297 043
>> int ph: +61 412 297 043
>> president at isoc-au.org.au
>> www.isoc-au.org.au
>>
>> On Fri, February 15, 2013 10:50 pm, Klaus Birkenbihl wrote:
>>> 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  æ— , 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/
>>
>>
>>
>
> Dan Graham
> Internet Society
>
> Office: +41 22 809 0368
> Mobile: +41 78 757 9943
>
> www.internetsociety.org
> www.twitter.com/internetsociety
> www.youtube.com/internetsocietyvideo
>
>
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner at Lateral Plains,
> and is believed to be clean.
>
>