Websites fail to meet needs of disabled people
http://www.100md.com
《英国医生杂志》
Online companies that fail to make their websites user friendly for disabled customers may have to pay out over ?0 000, says the Disability Rights Commission.
The Disability Discrimination Act requires all businesses to provide equal physical access to their products and services or face the threat of prosecution—which would entail paying up to ?000 ($9000; �7500) compensation plus legal costs starting at ?0 000.
The commission estimates that websites are missing out on a market of up to 12 million UK adults who cannot use the internet because of physical or other disabilities.
Disabled people are missing out, says the commission. 揂 lot of companies and special offers are only available on the internet. So some disabled people can抰 use internet banking or get cheap holiday deals and low interest rates,?Sue Pratt, press officer for the Disability Rights Commission, told the BMJ.
揥e are not taking about renovating a 100 year old building here—this is new technology,?she added.
Bert Massie, the commission抯 chairman, said: 揙rganisations that offer goods and services on the web already have a legal duty to make their sites accessible to disabled people. But where the response is inadequate, the industry should be prepared for disabled people to use the law to make the web a less hostile place.?/p>
Working with the Centre for Computer Interaction Design at London抯 City University, the commission looked at 1000 public websites from the government, business, leisure, web services, and e-commerce.
Of these, 100 were evaluated by a disabled users group whose members had a range of impairments. The visually impaired users had the greatest difficulty. They were unable to perform nearly half the tasks set as part of the research, even while using devices such as screen readers. According to the report, 81% of sites 揻ailed to satisfy the most basic Web Accessibility Initiative category.?/p>
In the same study, researchers canvassed the views of 700 businesses and nearly 400 website developers. The commission found that only 9% of web designers they had spoken to asked disabled people to help test their site.
Problems included cluttered pages, poor contrast between content and background, and confusing navigation.
The report from the Disability Rights Commission contains 15 main key recommendations, including a call for the government to introduce a formal accreditation process for user friendly sites.
Leonie Watson, chairwoman of the British Web Design and Marketing Association抯 usability and accessibility抯 working group, said: 揑t抯 a great report that carries a lot of weight. The problem stems from a lack of awareness, which can be solved by communication梖rom talking to journalists to talking to your friend in the pub.?
Peter Hearn, head of technology for bmj.com and the BMJ Publishing Group, said, 揟he publishing group operates over 30 websites created at different times over the past eight years. Sites launched in the past 12 months, like clinicalevidence.com and besttreatments.co.uk, are close to compliance with priority 2 of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines published by the World Wide Consortium (see www.w3C.org).
揟he majority of our older websites meet basic accessibility guidelines, and we are establishing a programme to raise the level of all sites.?(London, Nadeeja Koralage)
The Disability Discrimination Act requires all businesses to provide equal physical access to their products and services or face the threat of prosecution—which would entail paying up to ?000 ($9000; �7500) compensation plus legal costs starting at ?0 000.
The commission estimates that websites are missing out on a market of up to 12 million UK adults who cannot use the internet because of physical or other disabilities.
Disabled people are missing out, says the commission. 揂 lot of companies and special offers are only available on the internet. So some disabled people can抰 use internet banking or get cheap holiday deals and low interest rates,?Sue Pratt, press officer for the Disability Rights Commission, told the BMJ.
揥e are not taking about renovating a 100 year old building here—this is new technology,?she added.
Bert Massie, the commission抯 chairman, said: 揙rganisations that offer goods and services on the web already have a legal duty to make their sites accessible to disabled people. But where the response is inadequate, the industry should be prepared for disabled people to use the law to make the web a less hostile place.?/p>
Working with the Centre for Computer Interaction Design at London抯 City University, the commission looked at 1000 public websites from the government, business, leisure, web services, and e-commerce.
Of these, 100 were evaluated by a disabled users group whose members had a range of impairments. The visually impaired users had the greatest difficulty. They were unable to perform nearly half the tasks set as part of the research, even while using devices such as screen readers. According to the report, 81% of sites 揻ailed to satisfy the most basic Web Accessibility Initiative category.?/p>
In the same study, researchers canvassed the views of 700 businesses and nearly 400 website developers. The commission found that only 9% of web designers they had spoken to asked disabled people to help test their site.
Problems included cluttered pages, poor contrast between content and background, and confusing navigation.
The report from the Disability Rights Commission contains 15 main key recommendations, including a call for the government to introduce a formal accreditation process for user friendly sites.
Leonie Watson, chairwoman of the British Web Design and Marketing Association抯 usability and accessibility抯 working group, said: 揑t抯 a great report that carries a lot of weight. The problem stems from a lack of awareness, which can be solved by communication梖rom talking to journalists to talking to your friend in the pub.?
Peter Hearn, head of technology for bmj.com and the BMJ Publishing Group, said, 揟he publishing group operates over 30 websites created at different times over the past eight years. Sites launched in the past 12 months, like clinicalevidence.com and besttreatments.co.uk, are close to compliance with priority 2 of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines published by the World Wide Consortium (see www.w3C.org).
揟he majority of our older websites meet basic accessibility guidelines, and we are establishing a programme to raise the level of all sites.?(London, Nadeeja Koralage)