Disability Compliance is not optional (nor ethical)!

By now, almost everyone knows that opportunistic law firms are suing for non-compliance with ADA rules on Website Accessibility. But, how much do law firms have to worry? A lot. It turns out, several of our clients have been ‘questioned’ about the accessibility of their websites. And all it takes is one disgruntled visitor using accessibility tools to initiate a law suit. Clearly those law firms that represent disabled interests, and have a higher number of disabled visitors are more likely to trigger this. But even if they don’t there’s a good chance that if your site is non-compliant with ADA regulations, it also has a host of other issues.

You see, the ADA compliance rules are not new at all. They’ve been worked into the W3C spec and have been part of every good web developer’s process for at least a few years. That means that any website built recently SHOULD be – to a large degree – compliant. However, compliance is not a pass/fail sort of test. Unlike ADA rules for physical buildings, and inspector can not check out your website and provide you with a certificate. This has to be a fundamental consideration DURING construction of a website and an ongoing consideration AFTER the launch. Your firm’s websites are constantly being updated with new content, so it’s important that everything new also accommodates compliance. Good CMS systems provide the appropriate tools (and training) on how to remain compliant long after launch.

It’s not like we could fix a few issues and make all sites compliant.

Sure, some older websites are not that bad. Add a few ALT attributes here, and a TabIndex there, and call it a day. But the reality is that most older sites have issues that far surpass the basic fixes. You can typically run a series of tests to see what code issues exist. In many cases, the issues are less with the code, and more with the design. Many designers have chosen to use unconventional form controls (like custom select boxes) that while “pretty” also cause major inaccessibility issues. Others have selected color palettes that do not provide enough contrast for those with poor vision. And others yet have images or photos with text above them, which makes the text more difficult to read.

Compliance does not mean your site should be ugly.

Certainly you should not have to compromise aesthetics for compatibility. We’ve designed a multitude of sites that do very well in a variety of automated and manual tests. All you must do is be cognizant (during design) of how your site appears on a variety of screen readers, computers with accessibility settings and a variety of other enabling tools.

Can’t we simply create a separate disability-friendly website?

If we’ve learned anything from the death of the “adaptive” website, it’s that separate but equal is not equal (or did we learn that before 2013?). Detection mechanisms are often flawed, and no one wants a degraded experience. So, the best thing to do is to start fresh and be a good internet citizen.