|
Performing a validation helps to assure that...
- Your page is more likely to be legible across a variety of
browsers.
- Your page is more likely to be legible on new browser versions as
they become available.
- Your page should more easily be read by automatic means, such as
technology for the blind.
- You may even be protected against a lawsuit for discrimination (see
below).
Effective Sept. 1, 2003:
-
We validate new Web sites which we create at no extra cost.
-
We validate new pages which we create on an existing Web site at
no extra cost.
-
We validate existing pages on any site upon request at our
standard hourly rate.
Validation is comprised of testing a page against the Standards
recommendation as established in
World Wide Web Consortium guidelines. We will incorporate associated
upgrades and changes in the page. (Note that the development of standards
and testing procedures is an on-going evolution.) If a given page does
not meet validation criteria (such as if you require a
"refresh" function, which is not part of the above
specifications) you will be notified of such.
|
We validate pages intended to be accessed by search engines.
However, we may exclude certain special pages ... those
designed to be used on certain browsers and are usually so marked
... shopping cart and other dynamically generated pages
... and those which use non-standard functions such as
"refresh" and for which a "work-around" is
provided on the page.
|
Disclaimer -- Whenever we mention "lawsuit" we want to
make clear that we are not a legal service, nor do we give legal
advice, nor do we represent ourselves as such. This page is
posted in the spirit of disclosure and offer, to show what we can do as
your agent to help.The question you will want to ask yourself
is,"Did your last Web builder ever tell you this important
stuff?"
|
Please note that the content and context of a final Web page is
always your final responsibility. Our responsibility is limited
to doing the task(s) which we promise in writing to perform
regarding a specific case. We cannot be held responsible for the
actions or inaction of a third party such as W3C.
|
Go to next column
|
In this regard, we note a legal case in Australia,
Maguire v SOCOG regarding human rights, the decision being handed
down on August 24, 2000. The following extract may give a gist of
it:
|
"On 7 June 1999 the complainant, who is blind, complained to the
Commission that he was unlawfully discriminated against by the
respondent in three respects: the failure to provide
braille copies of the information required to place orders for
Olympic Games tickets; the failure to provide braille copies of
the Olympic Games souvenir programme; and the failure to
provide a web site which was accessible to the complainant."
...
"Because of the manner in which that information was made
available, it could be accessed by a sighted person. Because of
the manner which that information was made available it could not
be accessed by a blind person because of his or her disability.
This meant that, in respect of the same information, the
respondent, in the manner in which it used its computer
technology to service the needs of the public to have access to
that information, made it available to sighted persons, but it
made it unavailable or only partly available to a blind person
because of the latter's disability. It follows that, because of
his or her disability, the blind person was treated less
favourably by the respondent than the sighted person.
"That in my view constitutes direct discrimination within
the meaning of section 5 of the DDA."
-- The Honourable W. J. Carter QC
Inquiry Commissioner
|
The specifics regarding the Internet itself revolved in part around the
unavailability of "alt" tags on images and image map links on the
Website...
|
"To put this in context, the complainant had alleged that,
prior to the lodgement of his complaint with the Commission, he
had on 7 June 1999 spoken to SOCOG personnel in the course of
which he had sought information about the availability of the
Ticket Book in braille and had been told inter alia that
'blind people can access information if it is available on the
internet.' He had replied 'That is not correct. We can only
access information if it is presented in accordance with
international accessibility guidelines. The SOCOG website does
not comply with those guidelines, so a lot of information is not
accessible to me.' The reply allegedly was to the effect that a
blind person would have to engage the assistance of a sighted
person to assist him."
|
Webmaster's comment: We at rocksolidsite.com
validate the pages of our own site according to the aforementioned
guidelines. We post W3C validation logos on sites that we test for
compliance, usually on the Home page thereof.
|
