amazon?

Sun Aug 25 16:21:15 UTC 2019

I disagree,
For example, currently on the amazon  website they market something called 
disability customer service...without proper marketing explanation. 
Further  they currently, or at least recently marketed an option for those 
wanting a simplified avenue to the site.  meaning the marketing team 
realized that some people just seek to get their shopping done.  If you 
are going  to advertise as much, you should provide what is advertised, and 
they are not doing this now.

Question is why  because they can afford to provide these solutions.  i 
personally suspect their token staff, defining access by themselves 
instead of universal web design practices.

On Sun, 25 Aug 2019, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:

> That's impossible for a simple marketing reason.  Marketers know the
> most expensive thing that can be changed about a product and web sites
> are products is packaging.  The only way possible for any progress is
> through litigation since litigation will cost more than packaging
> changes would have cost for the example corporations.
>
> On Sun, 25 Aug 2019, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:
>
>> Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019 08:35:27
>> From: Linux for blind general discussion <blinux-list at redhat.com>
>> To: Linux for blind general discussion <blinux-list at redhat.com>
>> Subject: Re: amazon?
>>
>> Personally, all I want ouit of Amazon is the /option/ to use a simpler site,
>> with no legal beating over the head with a stick and nobody jumping up and
>> down and threatening to sue Amazon under legislation. I'd rather Amazon do it
>> off their own back. I'd rather, say, use Amazon's mobile site that would be
>> less cluttered and easy to navigate (since I find Amazon insaley hard to use,
>> even before losing my sight it was a pain in the butt to get around honestly,
>> I don't know why they feel like they got to clutter up the pages so much). I
>> just want options, without legal precedent, and for the record, I ain't in the
>> US so all the talk of ADA does not apply here, though given my country is just
>> about gearing up to spectacularly implode.....the ADA does not apply here. I
>> actually don't know if we have website accessibility reules here, if we do
>> I've rarely if ever seen them reported by the media here, the sole sources I
>> find are all US-centric.
>>
>> And that raises another point. Let's say that Japan adopts new legislation.
>> Amazon.jp will, for argument's sake, comply. Amazon.de won't comply with the
>> Japanese legislation because...Germany is not Japan. Amazon.br won't because
>> Brazil is not Germany. Point is, every country has their own legislation they
>> go by. Amazon can't point to the ADA and say see, that's our global standard,
>> because every country treats accessibility differently, so if Amazon /wanted/
>> to comply with all the rules, they'd need to go over every single site in
>> every country they operate in, and comply with the local laws. Which would be
>> slow going, and costly.
>>
>> On 25/08/2019 05:44, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:
>>> Amazon does business in other countries where such standard requirements do
>>> exist.
>>> Besides, Amazon? is not claiming that it need not be inclusive. Rather it is
>>> pretending, without? cross platform testing and actual attempts to provide a
>>> uniform experience, that it exists with them.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, 24 Aug 2019, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:
>>>
>>>> Congress has not attached web accessibility guidelines to the ADA,
>>>> guidelines were not established under President Obama and President Trump's
>>>> administration is officially not pursuing any such guidelines.
>>>> https://www.boia.org/blog/is-website-accessibility-required-under-the-ada
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Amazon is not covered under Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, as the
>>>> Department of the Navy is.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Don't get me wrong, I think the ADA extends to web sites, and I think
>>>> Domino's will lose, but the legal question has yet to be settled. This
>>>> would all be moot if the DoJ under Obama or Trump had adopted the WCAD 2.0
>>>> standards as the standards applying to web accessibility under the ADA.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 8/24/19 3:02 PM, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:
>>>>> ?I predict Dominos will have its clock thoroughly cleaned.? Precedent
>>>>> ?even in the Supreme Court isn't on their side.
>>>>> ?Congress made it clear what accessibility requirements are in the
>>>>> ?accessibility process and that happened in 2010.? There's about 16
>>>>> ?technical requirements and a Preamble to Section 508 and this was
>>>>> ?something D.O.D. got measured against in 2012 when Obama required a
>>>>> ?D.O.D.-wide accessibility report.? End result of that was the United
>>>>> ?States Navy was Accessibility Leader and the United States Navy was
>>>>> ?still left with serious problems and all other components had much work
>>>>> ?to do.? I know about that having worked for the Navy during that time.
>>>>>
>>>>> ?On Sat, 24 Aug 2019, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> ? Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2019 15:53:37
>>>>>> ? From: Linux for blind general discussion <blinux-list at redhat.com>
>>>>>> ? To: blinux-list at redhat.com
>>>>>> ? Subject: Re: amazon?
>>>>>>> ? Amazon is definitely aware of Linux. They have apps running on
>>>>> Android >? and
>>>>>> ? even platforms that use Android as their OS. They support Linux
>>>>> in AWS
>>>>>> ? including their own flavor of Linux. I'm sure their are some
>>>>> staff at >? Amazon
>>>>>> ? who don't know about Linux, but that doesn't mean the company is
>>>>> unaware >? of or
>>>>>> ? doesn't care about Linux.
>>>>>>>> ? BTW, there is still a legal question as to whether a web site
>>>>> which >? offers
>>>>>> ? products or services to the public needs to be accessible. The
>>>>> ADA >? doesn't
>>>>>> ? have companion guidelines on what it means for a site to be
>>>>> accessible >? and
>>>>>> ? Domino's is going to court to claim that the ADA doesn't require
>>>>> them to >? make
>>>>>> ? their site or apps accessible. I think the ADA does apply to
>>>>> public web >? sites,
>>>>>> ? and I think Domino's will lose, but that doesn't mean it isn't
>>>>> still an >? open
>>>>>> ? legal question.
>>>>>>>>> ? On 8/24/19 2:11 PM, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:
>>>>>>> ? 1. My comment regarding Linux is based on direct communications
>>>>> with > >? Amazon
>>>>>>> ? staff,? who have confessed not to have heard of it,and? who
>>>>> have no > >? direct
>>>>>>> ? contact with their so called accessibility team when problems
>>>>> arise.
>>>>>>> ? 2. them properly compiled? elinks and links function with java
>>>>> script.
>>>>>>> ? 3.? Access is tied to interaction which is why even later
>>>>> editions of > >? lynx
>>>>>>> ? can manage some scripting, submit buttons for example.
>>>>>>>>> ? 4. since adaptive technology is often a substitution for
>>>>> the persons > >? eyes,
>>>>>>> ? hands, brain, and the like, what gives you the right to state that
>>>>>>> ? technology choices are not tied to physical mandates?? How does
>>>>> your > >? stance
>>>>>>> ? differ from those who claim that access need not exist at all,?
>>>>> or > >? that all
>>>>>>> ? those sharing? a label are the same?
>>>>>>> ? 5. the names of access or other individuals at amazon
>>>>> confirming your
>>>>>>> ? assumption here?? the legal stance is that if a site serves the ?
>>>>>>> public, an
>>>>>>> ? individual can expect equal public access...which is why?
>>>>> alternative
>>>>>>> ? doors??? are to exist? in the first place.
>>>>>>> ? How do you know what low graphics can or cannot do if you do
>>>>> not > >? follow
>>>>>>> ? their development?? This is about keyboard response which
>>>>> exists in
>>>>>>> ? graphical? browsers like elinks and links.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ? On Fri, 23 Aug 2019, Linux for blind general
>>>>> discussion wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> ? I don't believe for a minute that the accessibility staff
>>>>> at Amazon > > >? has
>>>>>>>> ? either forgotten or stopped caring about Linux accessibility. ?
>>>>>>>> Realistically
>>>>>>>> ? though, it is possible that they have stopped worrying about
>>>>> the > > >? very small
>>>>>>>> ? number of people who still use text-based browsers and expect
>>>>> them > > >? to work
>>>>>>>> ? for shopping, banking and other modern internet tasks. The
>>>>> thing is > > >? Linux
>>>>>>>> ? accessibility in 2019 != lynx/links/elinks accessibility. In
>>>>> fact, > > >? this
>>>>>>>> ? hasn't been the case since about 2008 or so
>>>>>>>> ? .
>>>>>>>> ? Unfortunately, text-based browsers have not kept up with the
>>>>> rest of > > >? the
>>>>>>>> ? internet, and can't be expected to work well for most
>>>>> websites > > >? without a
>>>>>>>> ? major overhaul, especially since they don't even support the
>>>>> latest > > >? HTML5
>>>>>>>> ? standards, nor do they support accessibility standards that
>>>>> have > > >? been in
>>>>>>>> ? place for years. Even w3m doesn't fully support the w3c's own ?
>>>>>>>> standards.
>>>>>>>>>>> ? Yes, I can see why some people may want these
>>>>> light-weight and fast
>>>>>>>> ? browsers to work with Amazon, and yes, they should be made
>>>>> aware of > > >? the
>>>>>>>> ? problems that people are having. But to say that Amazon
>>>>> doesn't care > > >? about
>>>>>>>> ? Linux accessibility because their site doesn't work with a >
>>>>>>> ? text-based
>>>>>>>> ? browser is at best a gross exageration, and is at worst a
>>>>> grave > > >? disservice
>>>>>>>> ? to those of us who use Linux and a screen reader at the same
>>>>> time.
>>>>>>>> ? Imetumwa kutoka miti
>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> ? Blinux-list mailing list
>>>>>>>> ? Blinux-list at redhat.com
>>>>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> ? Blinux-list mailing list
>>>>>>> ? Blinux-list at redhat.com
>>>>>>> ? https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
>>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Christopher (CJ)
>>>> Chaltain at Gmail
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Blinux-list mailing list
>>>> Blinux-list at redhat.com
>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Blinux-list mailing list
>>> Blinux-list at redhat.com
>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Blinux-list mailing list
>> Blinux-list at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
>>
>
> -- 
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blinux-list mailing list
> Blinux-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
>
>