A lot of businesses may not be aware that the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 also covers the accessibility of web sites as well as the physical accessibility to business premises for the disabled. With the use of speech synthesiser and other software and hardware blind, partially sighted and other disabled people can readily access the Web.
The rules regarding web site accessibility are based on the RNIB guidelines which are themselves based upon the W3C - Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. These guidelines are broken down into three main sections. The first section of the guidelines is very sensible and it is suggested that adhering to them is following 'best practice' anyway. They cover such things as:
- Maintaining the contrast of type colour against the background, e.g. don't use yellow type against a white background
- Putting alternate text headings on all graphics so that people who rely on voice software know what the graphic is
- Indicate the language that the site is written in.
- Maintaining legible font sizes and colours
However, sections 2 and 3 of the guidelines become more and more technically orientated and in a number of instances contradict themselves.
It is significant, in our opinion, that no prosecutions have been made in regard to non-conforming web sites. This is probably due to the lack of clarity in the guidelines and, to some degree, the impracticability of implementing them. It is even questionable whether the RNIB's web site conforms entirely to Sections 2 and 3 of the guidelines.
However, some people interpret the full implementation of the guidelines in such a way as to infer that a site will appear quite bland and uninteresting and this is quite important in an environment where the design of the home page needs to catch a visitor's attention in a very few seconds. It is true that a number of the "flashy" pop up, transitions and media effects cannot be implemented but it does not mean the site will be bland and uninteresting.
This site conforms entirely with the W3C rules and receives nearly one and a half million hits a year and would suggest that a lot of visitors don't find it bland and uninteresting
A number of lawyers are recommending that a business obtain an indemnity from the web site designer to cover the cost of any liability that might arise from the site not complying with the Act. However, should a web site designer give such an indemnity, in order to protect themselves it may well be that the site you end up with may not meet your requirements, and be bland and uninteresting, as they may interpret the rules as I have suggested above.
if your web designer takes this view the better approach, in our view, is to provide alternate pages which are basically 'text only pages' that are clearly signposted from the Home Page. These pages, although bland and uninteresting to the majority, will fulfil the needs of others and ensure you are not subject to prosecution and a hefty fine. In many cases these pages can double up as Printer Friendly pages. You can then incorporate all your wiz-bang ideas on the main pages and still be conforming with the Act. However, we would still suggest that your main pages comply with Section 1 of the guidelines as even the most eagle-eyed of us have difficulty reading light blue text on a lilac background.
Disclaimer. The above information is given as a practical solution to conforming with the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 but the Alresford Chamber of Commerce can take no responsibility in respect of any person, business, company or organisation who relies on this information to ensure conformance with the Act.