As I’ve previously stated, when the economy goes down, implementation costs go up. That’s bad news as budgets tend to follow the economy downards. It is also bad news for the area of web accessibility, as it is among those requirements that as a soft target tend to get a low priority. If management has to choose between implementing self-service and making the website accessible, there is no doubt what gets the go-ahead.
Having been in this industry for over a decade, I find it really embarrassing that so many websites still do not follow accessibility guidelines, such as the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG). How can we build websites in 2009 without thinking on the very large minority that live with some sort of disability?
Many European countries still have limited or no legislation when it comes to web accessibility. Consequently, software vendors have not been on the ball when it comes to engineering accessibility into their products and many consultancies have very limited understanding of accessibility. Today, many websites even new government sites fail miserably at accessibility tests. See The Danish Prime Minister’s Office or the upcoming UN Climate Change Conference for recent examples. The United Kingdom, is the positive exception here, where enforced legislation is in place and I’ve been impressed with some of the accessibility features offered by regional vendors (e.g. GOSS, Terminalfour) that assist web editors in producing accessible web content.
Accessibility does cost money to implement and with the current financial crisis, it seems highly unlikely that any government will introduce new legislation mandating compliance. What we might see, if we are lucky, are more recommendations. But this is not enough: only legislation will eventually make the web accessible and usable for all.
Mark Morrell February 19th, 2009 22:21
I’m not sure I agree with you on costs. Providing you start off at the beginning with the concept of building accessible code, the costs can be negligible and the benefits considerable.
BT takes web accessibility very seriously for any impaired user. We have bought IBM Rational Policy Tester (was Watchfire) to enforce compliance. We find many benefits from having accessible code. It helps other users who are mobile or need a copy of a transcript of a podcast for example to read while travelling.
Our accessibility framework involves publisher training, standards, clauses in procurement contracts, accessible templates as well as checks. It’s in our bloodstream and BT uses it as a competitive advantage over other intranet services companies on how serious BT is about corporate social responsibility.
For what we do on intranets have a look at http://markmorrell.wordpress.com/2008/08/22/prevention-is-better-and-cheaper-than-cure/.
Mark
Janus Boye February 19th, 2009 22:21
I agree entirely that accessibility is not expensive, in particular if you get it right from the beginning.
Unfortunately many consultancies still try to charge extra fees for writing accessible code and it takes a very informed customer to not accept it and challenge the consultancy to do better.
Also, many existing sites are not accessible and it will take money and some serious planning to get it fixed. I’m speculating that here in 2009 most organisations will rather try to get some more self-service than fix accessibility.
Finally, it is worth adding that Google actually prefers sites that are accessible and written using valid code. That means that if you have 2 exactly identical pages, where one is accessible and the other is not, then the accessible version will rank highest.
Janus
The Myths of Accessibility in 2009 « StandardsGirl.com - Views From Within March 20th, 2009 22:21
[...] 20, 2009 I see articles like this one and it saddens me http://www.jboye.com/blogpost/forget-about-accessibility-in-2009/. The writer is not wrong, as I am sure the arguments he suggests are ones that are brought up in [...]