**SEE The Addendum below for a correction to this post**
The Rehabilitation Act and specifically section 508 is one of the most ridiculous laws that only Washington bureaucrats who have absolutely no understanding of technology or web development could conceive.
The purpose of the law is to allow disabled people to browse the internet, especially those that are blind, or vision impaired.
To accomplish this, there are screen readers that attempt to verbally interpret what is being displayed visually.
In order for the screen reader to properly interpret the page, the HTML markup must be formatted in a manner that allows the user to understand the screen reader.
I think this technology is very cool, and I think it is absolutely great to help disabled people use the internet.
I commend any developer or business that cares enough about its disabled customers to accommodate their needs on the internet.
In addition, many of the requirements in section 508 are good web development practices.
The reason I think this law is ridiculous is that these practices are no longer voluntary, but mandated.
In many cases, it is very hard adhere to all of the mandates when a developer is attempting to offer a richer experience to non-impaired users. For instance drag-and-drop functionality, pop-ups, or any other visual experience such as animations, are very difficult (if not impossible) to convey to a visually impaired user.
Aside from the technical challenge this law presents. I am completely opposed to its premise: Viewing a web page and using the internet should be a voluntary interaction between the user and the developer/business. Nobody is forcing the user to view the web page, and consequently, the user can not force the developer/business to display the web page. It’s a violation of property rights, voluntary exchange, and freedom of expression to mandate a law such as 508 compliance.
A developer/business is now faced with one option. Either make it 508 compliant….or don’t make it at all.
My current company is spending countless man-hours and lots of money trying to make our websites 508 compliant. The Target corporation just settled a 6 million dollar lawsuit for violating 508 compliance.
Big companies can afford to make their sites 508 compliant. Small businesses and fledgling entrepreneurs will have a much more difficult time garnering the resources to adhere to 508 compliance. In many cases, a visually impaired person is not even in the customer base, or represents such a small portion its simply not financially viable to accommodate those customers.
In addition, amateur developers will have a much more difficult time entering the market. It takes a certain level of expertise and knowledge to make a site 508 compliant, and those that are learning to develop will have the added difficulty of learning 508 compliance.
This law, with admirable goals, looks harmless and beneficial to the community, but really its a violation of individual rights. It creates a barrier to market entry that aides big businesses and diverts resources from more productive endeavors.
Addendum **IMPORTANT**
After writing this post, I had a training session on section 508 compliance, that clarified a large misunderstanding that I had regarding 508 compliance. In short, section 508 only applies to government websites, and contracts the government makes with private companies. My company is concerned about 508 compliance because we seek government contracts which require compliance.
The Target lawsuit led me to believe section 508 required all websites to be compliant, but that is not the case. In reality the The National Federation of the Blind had very tenuous legal standing, and were suing under discrimination covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act, and not specifically under 508 compliance.
Some law makers, however, are trying to expand the Americans with Disabilities Act to specifically cover private web based technologies and internet sites, in which case this post becomes vitally relavant.