Spider Trax

Definitions of Web Accessibility

There seems to be something of a minor argument raging recently over where ‘web accessibility’ ends and ‘universality’ begins.

Mike Cherim and Gez Lemon have illustrated both sides of the argument beautifully in The Great Accessibility Camp-Out whilst Accessibility In Trouble 2: Standards argues that, whatever personal view developers hold, they should at least agree to abide by the W3C / WAI definition of ‘accessibility’.

Watching this from the sidelines, it occurred to me that the root problem was semantic in nature and revolves around what is exactly meant by the term ‘web accessibility’. So I started off trying to:

1. Find an absolute definition for the term
2. See if I could spot where the breakdown in communication was occurring
3. Consider what could be done to resove the problem

I started off with WAI which kindly defines web accessibility in its introduction:

Web accessibility means that people with disabilities can use the Web. More specifically, Web accessibility means that people with disabilities can perceive, understand, navigate, and interact with the Web, and that they can contribute to the Web. Web accessibility also benefits others, including older people with changing abilities due to aging.
Introduction to Web Accessibility

So far, so good.

However, the above depends upon the definition of ‘disability’ as web accessibility only applies to those who have a disability and, whilst WAI provides examples of how people with different disabilities might use the Web, that is not the same thing as defining the whole group clearly.

So, in order to understand which groups of people we’re talking about, we need to first of all define exactly what ‘disability’ is. I don’t think anyone can deny that someone who cannot see has a disability but what about someone has a slow connection because they cannot afford a faster one? Is that a disability? What if they’re connecting via a semi-public machine which uses older software and they cannot do anything about it? Is that a disability?

I needed a definition of ‘disability’!

1. lack of adequate power, strength, or physical or mental ability; incapacity.
2. a physical or mental handicap, esp. one that prevents a person from living a full, normal life or from holding a gainful job.
3. anything that disables or puts one at a disadvantage

Dictionary.com

The third definition would seem to suggest that it would be reasonable to describe someone with a slow connection as ‘disabled’ but I wasn’t completely convinced, so I turned to the UK Disability Discrimination Act. In the Act, ‘disability’ is defined as:

a mental or physical impairment that has an adverse effect on your ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities
What counts as a disability according to the law ?

That was some help but I was still left wondering if, these days, Internet connectivity could come under the heading “normal day-to-day activities”. So - still not precise and clear enough. What I needed was the kind of definition a lawyer might use that gave as little room as possible for misinterpretation.

disability:

inability to pursue an occupation because of a physical or mental impairment; specifically : inability to engage in any substantial gainful activity because of a medically determinable physical or mental impairment that can be expected to result in death or to be of long continued or indefinite duration in accordance with the Social Security Act
Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Law. Merriam-Webster, Inc. 05 Oct. 2006.

At last! The key phrase, in my opinion, is “medically determinable” which could be used to precisely define the area covered by web accessibility.

Where did the breakdown in communication occur? I believe the fault lies with WAI. They defined web accessibility in the context of disability without also clearly defining what they meant by ‘disabilities’. This, in turn, left their definition of web accessibility open to multiple interpretations.

What can be done to resolve the problem? I suggest that WAI consider defining their terminology a little better - specifically their meaning of the term ‘disability’ along the lines of:

inability to pursue an activity because of a medically determinable physical or mental impairment

I did try searching WAI to see if they had defined the term further in a supplementary document but, thus far, I haven’t found anything. Even if such a definition does exist somewhere within the bowels of the WAI site, I think it deserves a higher profile - preferably on the Introduction to Web Accessibility page. Perhaps then we can all start singing from the same song sheet?

However, just before I finish - one final question:

If someone is limited to a slow ‘net connection due to financial constraints that are the direct result of their (for example) visual impairment, is this a secondary disability?

Top