Sign up for our free official newsletter. Circulation, 1362 members
Sign up for our free official newsletter. Circulation, 1362 members
Are your PDFs documents accessible? Are they AODA compliant?
Accessibility News recommends Accessibil-IT for all your accessible documentation needs.
In this section will be letters that have been emailed to various Organizations, Governments or other entities that we want to bring accessibility issues to their attention.
Date sent : January 17, 2008
Note: This letter was originally written and sent on February 24 th, 2007 and is being repeated with a minor change, because the issue still has not been addressed.
Dear Heart and Stroke
More specifically, Frank Rubini.
It is that time of year again; I email you about your commercial that you are currently running, the one that has text on the screen, letting viewers know of what symptoms that might suggest that you could have a stroke or heart attack. The one that is supported by the Provincial Government. The one I have brought to your attention in 2004, 2005, 2007 and now 2008.
As I have stated to you over and over again, this commercial discriminates against blind, deaf/blind, partially sighted, the print disabled,, including those who are illiterate either because they are new immigrants who cannot read our language or the many adults who have learning disabillities. It's also possible that it might cause seizures.
According to Section 508 of the Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA):
"(j) Pages shall be designed to avoid causing the screen to flicker with a frequency
greater than 2 Hz and lower than 55 Hz.
Why is this provision necessary?
This provision is necessary because some individuals with photosensitive epilepsy
can have a seizure triggered by displays that flicker, flash, or blink, particularly if the flash has a high intensity and is within certain frequency
ranges. The 2 Hz limit was chosen to be consistent with proposed revisions to the ADA Accessibility Guidelines which, in turn, are being harmonized with
the International Code Council (ICC)/ANSI A117 standard, "Accessible and Usable Buildings and Facilities", ICC/ANSI A117.1-1998 which references
a 2 Hz limit. An upper limit was identified at 55 Hz."
taken from http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/guide/1194.22.htm#(j).
As I have also stated and I quote "How long do those of us who cannot
see what symptoms to be aware of, have to wait? Do we have to be in a hospital
bed suffering from a stroke that may have been prevented had we known?"
Each time I have contacted you I was given reason to believe that you would
address this commercial so that it is accessible to all Ontarians. The last
time I contacted you on February 3rd, 2005 you wrote:
"The Foundation is in the process of developing a possible new stroke television
spot for the next phase of the campaign, so your timing is perfect!!!."
Well Mr Rubini, it is January 2008, 3 full years after your comments and still no accessible commercial and sadly one supported by the Provincial Government who made us feel that we may have turned the corner on discrimination by passing Bill 118, the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA).
So I ask, when will the Heart and Stroke stop using this discriminating commercial and give us one that will let all Ontarians know of what symptoms to look for with regards to a stroke?
Best regards
Geof Collis
Accessibility News
Sent to:
Frank Rubini, frubini@hsf.on.ca
Copied to
Date sent : April 27, 2007
from Citizens With Disabilities - Ontario www.cwd-o.org
April 26, 2007
Discrimination in Municipal Transit Systems
A systemic barrier exists in every municipality in Ontario, discriminating against the rights of frail seniors and persons with disabilities. Freedom of movement is a fundamental, unchallenged right across Canada, but in Ontario municipal transportation services have developed in a way that denies frail seniors and persons with disabilities freedom of movement.
Public transportation within urban boundaries is the responsibility of municipal governments. The cost of transportation services is the direct responsibility of the municipality with secondary funding from the Province of Ontario. All public transportation within urban boundaries is subsidized heavily for all users, whether regular or special needs services. Generally transit fares cover only 50% - 60% of all transit system operating costs.
Municipal governments are fully responsible for delivery of public transportation services including setting schedules, routes and user fees. Any person, whether they live in a municipality or not, can use the regular transit system anywhere in the province by paying the required fare. Those persons requiring special needs transportation can only access these services in the municipality where they live, and are denied services in every other Ontario municipality.
Transit service operations across the province are subsidized at two levels, the provincial government makes a contribution under the Dedicated Gas Tax Program that is generally the same regardless of location; and the municipality covers the balance of the service costs.
The Dedicated Gas Tax Program is essentially based on a 70/30 split between transit ridership and population. Each municipality can determine how these funds are allocated between conventional and specialized transit services, but all funds are used to subsidize transit operating costs.
Probably the best way to demonstrate the inequity of this situation is a comparison with the right to go fishing; with a provincial licence anyone can fish anywhere. Does it make sense for each municipality to issue its own fishing licence and ban non-licenced anglers from its rivers and lakes?
The solution is not complicated, in fact it is as simple as the program for obtaining a fishing licence. Move to a single provincial special needs transit licence system and require all municipalities to honour all registrants.
For further information contact Jerry Ford at jerry@ehwhat.ca.
Date sent : April 02, 2007
Re: Channel For Visually Impaired Spurs Dispute at http://www.accessibilitynews.ca/acnews/press/blind.php.
Dear Paul Vieira:
I presented an intervention at the hearings last week, in opposition to the proposed accessible Channel.
I did not hear, I mean had the words interpreted, during the hearing that the channel would also carry closed captioning, as an accessible channel is not just one that provides DVS. My opposition is primarily because Canadians are experiencing a movement of main-streaming services for people with disabilities,
a movement that seeks to achieve an environment where each service provider takes full responsibility for making its products and services accessible. I
don't like to see special treatment, in any shape or form, so let "the blind"
, fight for access as people who are deaf have, no special deals.
Our federal government has given companies some incentive of the ability to write off capital cost over two years, so that production of DVS is made easier, financially, with this latest budget announcement.
I think the article in the National post was well written, in an objective manner. Of all those who are legally blind, very few can't see the screen. That doesn't mean DVS is less needed, but figures shown for the growth of visual impairment is very misleading. Spending for an accessible channel, wouldn't serve all blind Canadians, and to suggest that this channel would provide programs of interest to blind people is ridiculous. People who become blind don't have a given set of interests, that population's characteristics mirror those of Canada's total population. Anyone can become blind, an uncomfortable fact, but true.
Penny Leclair
Community advocate, Ottawa
email preferred contact
penny.leclair@rogers.com
This email was sent to pvieira@nationalpost.com.
Date sent : February 24, 2007
Dear Heart and Stroke
More specifically, Frank Rubini.
It is that time of year again; I email you about your commercial that you are currently running, the one that has text on the screen, letting viewers know of what symptoms that might suggest that you could have a stroke or heart attack. The one that is supported by the Provincial Government. The one I have brought to your attention in 2004, 2005 and now, 2007.
As I have stated to you over and over again, this commercial discriminates against blind, deaf/blind, partially sighted, the print disabled,, including those who are illiterate either because they are new immigrants who cannot read our language or the many adults who for whatever reason cannot read period.
As I have also stated and I quote "How long do those of us who cannot
see what symptoms to be aware of, have to wait? Do we have to be in a hospital
bed suffering from a stroke that may have been prevented had we known?"
Each time I have contacted you I was given reason to believe that you would
address this commercial so that it is accessible to all Ontarians. The last
time I contacted you on February 3rd, 2005 you wrote:
"The Foundation is in the process of developing a possible new stroke television
spot for the next phase of the campaign, so your timing is perfect!!!."
Well Mr Rubini, it is February 2007, 2 full years after your comments and still no accessible commercial and sadly one supported by the Provincial Government who made us feel that we may have turned the corner on discrimination by passing Bill 118, the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA).
So I ask, when will the Heart and Stroke stop using this discriminating commercial and give us one that will let all Ontarians know of what symptoms to look for with regards to a stroke?
Best regards
Geof Collis
Accessibility News
Sent to:
Frank Rubini, frubini@hsf.on.ca
Copied to
Date sent : January 23, 2007
Dear Minister Meilleur
Accessibility News would like to thank you and your Government for the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) a much needed piece of legislation, given the closed minds of many in this Province regarding the rights of Persons With Disabilities (PWD's).
It is however unfortunate that it will take too long too implement and I will give you an excellent example of how it leaves PWD's waiting, as usual.
In November of 2005 I was adding websites to the Resource center of Accessibility News www.accessibilitynews.ca when I came across the Ombudsman website www.ombudsman.on.ca and being a web accessibility professional, I assessed the sites level of accessibility against the World Wide Web Consortiums (W3C) Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 (WCAG 1.0 at http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/) as I do for all sites I visit and found that it wasn't very accessible. I had brought this to the attention of the Accessibility Directorate and was told that it was being redesign and that my concerns would be addressed in the new site as accessibility was very important they said. It wasn't until recently that I went back to the site and was shocked at what I had found. This site is worse than the one I had previously checked and upon reassessing the site I found that it didn't meet even the minimum standards for web accessibility, meaning it will be an accessibility barrier to many PWD's.
This in itself is shocking enough, but what is even more disturbing is the fact that PWD's will have to wait until standards are set under Bill 118 and then this site will be given, 5? 10? More years before it will have to be brought up to Bill 118 standards that without a doubt will adhere to International guidelines that have been around since 1999 and are the cornerstone of Section 508 (http://www.section508.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Content&ID=3)of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), UK and Australian legislation as well as our Federal Government's Common Look and Feel Guidelines 2.0 (http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/clf2-nsi2/index-eng.asp).
Access to information technology creates opportunity for all, especially persons
with disabilities, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan says in a message for
The International Day of Disabled Persons, observed on 3 December under the
theme "E-accessibility"
(http://www.accessibilitynews.ca/acnews/press/all.php#a22,
"Kofi Annan: Make the Internet available to everyone"
).
Kofi Annan also states that this should be done in a timely manner, So I have to ask Minister Meilleur, given that the Federal Government has the Common, Look and Feel Guidelines, the Americans have their Section 508 and the UK and Australia have theirs, all based on WCAG 1.0, why can this Government not put forth some interim measures that all newly designed sites in Ontario, especially Government should meet a minimum set of standards until such time as Bill 118 guidelines are set.
Accessibility News cannot think of any logical reason, given all of the information
pointed out above, why this Government would allow websites to be built in the
Province of Ontario that are not built to a minimum set of standards, so that
PWD's are not left waiting for years to enjoy the same "Access to
Information"
that able bodied people are afforded right now.
How long are we expected to wait?
Regards
Geof Collis Accessibility News
This email was sent to all Provincial Politicians in Ontario, see http://www.accessibilitynews.ca/acnews/politicians/ for the email list.
Date sent : December 09, 2006
Dear Norfolk District Business Development Corporation (NDBDC)
I recently read an article by Helen Henderson titled "Frightening gaps
show we have far to go"
at http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?GXHC_gx_session_id_=0b85ea4608a998b7&pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1164840610395&call_pageid=1155636137428&col=1155636137421,
in which she writes:
But one of the most promising sources of hope may be found in an Ontario project to help
"northern and rural"small businesses serve people with disabilities.The EnAbling Change Partnership, to be launched Monday by Social and Enterprise Development Innovations in Simcoe, promises to provide some of the necessary tools, according to Social Services Minister Madeleine Meilleur.
Developed in co-operation with the Ontario Association of Community Futures Development Corporations Inc., the project features a website to help small businesses meet the needs of customers and employees with disabilities.
The launch, scheduled for 1 p.m. at the Norfolk District Business Development Corp., 4077 Highway 3, Simcoe, will also be carried interactively online starting at 1:30 p.m. at http://www.ndbdc.com/accessibility.
Helen Henderson's article was written regarding this years International
Day of Disabled Persons 2006, whose theme is "E-Accessibility"
or
Access to information and communication technologies.
After taking in all of this and seeing words like "promising"
, "hope"
,
"serving people with disabilities"
I visited your website and was
deeply disappointed by what I found. As a web accessibility professional I can
assure you that this website does not meet the minimum standards for web accessibility
as set out by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
1.0 (WCAG) at http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/ and is therefore an e-accessibility
barrier to so many disabilities and I have to ask how you can speak of accessibility
to the disabled on one hand and put up a website that is anything but accessible
on the other.
I have contacted the Community Futures Development Corporation in the past, on October 2004 and brought my concerns to the Communications Officer regarding accessibility of Community Futures websites and was told they MIGHT look into it in the future. I have looked at CFDC websites recently and I can tell you that absolutely nothing has changed and this site is just another example.
On your website I found the following text:
An EnAbling Change Initiative to increase the awareness and readiness of small and medium enterprises (SME) in Rural Ontario to respond to future mandatory accessibility standards being developed under the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) through this session's keynote speeches, introduction and live demonstration of the Accessibility Website.
Am I to understand that you are going to wait until Standards are in place before you take measures to make your website accessible to all Persons With Disabilities, even though World Wide Web Standards have been around since 1999 and are the cornerstone of laws such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Federal Governments Common Look and Feel (CLF) Guidelines? If this is the case then it hardly seems promising or hopeful for the disabled community, more like frightening as Helen Henderson writes.
In Ms Henderson's article she also wrote:
Nine years ago the Supreme Court of Canada issued a landmark ruling. It said, in effect, that Canadians with disabilities are entitled to equal access to and equal benefit from all government-funded services.
Since Community Futures receives funding from Industry Canada, then I believe that it should be governed by the Federal Government's Common Look and Feel Guidelines and we should not have to wait for AODA standards before you make ALL Community Futures websites accessible to ALL Persons With Disabilities (PWD's).
What is really frightening though are the people who have dropped the ball on this. The Federal Government funded this via Industry Canada and didn't bother to check to see if it measured up to Common Look and Feel Guidelines, the Provincial Government didn't bother to check if the site was accessible before endorsing it and Community Futures has made no effort to bring its sites up to world wide web standards, even though I brought it to their attention 2 years ago.
I believe that this kind of hypocrisy has to stop if we are to have true equal access to information in the disabled community.
Thank you for your time.
Geof Collis
Accessibility News
www.accessibilitynews.ca
This letter was sent to:
Accessibility News Published by
