amazon?
Linux for blind general discussion
blinux-list at redhat.com
Sun Aug 25 21:26:21 UTC 2019
I disagree with some of the assumptions in this post. First, I don't
think it's arduous or slow going to make a site accessible from the get
go. I also think these companies do enough business in these different
countries to justify the time and expense in making their sites
accessible. Amazon does enough business in Japan to justify making their
Japanese site accessible Finally, if a site follows the WCAD 2.0
standards, then any other changes they have to make should be trivial.
Note that the WCAD 2.0 standards are international and their are no
published standards for web accessibility under the ADA.
--
Christopher (CJ)
Chaltain at Gmail
On 8/25/19 7:35 AM, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:
> 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
--
Christopher (CJ)
Chaltain at Gmail
More information about the Blinux-list
mailing list