On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Tim Spalding <tim_at_librarything.com> wrote:
> Does anyone have any thoughts about library catalogs and accessibility?
> The topic as always puzzled me. Coming from K-6 education technology,
> where Section 508 was gospel, I was shocked when I came to libraries
> and library catalogs. (I still don't understand how, for instance, any
> library in California—which has a strong version of 508—can legally
> purchase any of the conventional OPACs.) Anyway, some newer OPACs are
> better.
Oh, it makes perfect sense in that it's probably a cognitive
disconnect between "reading" meaning "seeing" and "accessibility"
meaning "for blind people", and so developers don't take it too
seriously as "blind people can't read, so why bother?" forgetting 40%
of the population which are low vision, color-blind and / or any
variety of cognitive, physical or psychological disadvantage. It's
however not unique to the library world even though it's a strange
phenomenon that it should be so strong here.
> So, any recommendations for accessible OPACs, links about accessible OPACs, etc?
Vendors, vendors, vendors ... hmmm, should I say what I think about
vendors, especially on this subject? Probably not. Definitely not. The
open-source alternatives seems better, and, can be made better in a
jiffy. Good thing. Definitely good.
Regards,
Alex
--
Project Wrangler, SOA, Information Alchemist, UX, RESTafarian, Topic Maps
--- http://shelter.nu/blog/ ----------------------------------------------
------------------ http://www.google.com/profiles/alexander.johannesen ---
Received on Tue Aug 17 2010 - 18:57:49 EDT