Just as a point of interest - the Royal Australian Survey Corps used to
print topographic maps in colours that were readable in red light (such as
one might use in, say, a battle tank to preserve night vision) and I expect
that the civilian organisation which has replaced it does the same (it's
actually staffed by mostly the same people). A couple of blokes in the
Corps were colour-blind, and I don't recall that they had problems reading
our maps. The maps were also reasonably pleasing aesthetically. Anyone who
is actually concerned about this issue could probably find out exactly the
ink colours used without too much effort, and also translate them to the
computer screen if desired.
Regards,
David
Anthony
Quartararo To: gislist@geocomm.com
<ajq3@tampaba cc:
y.rr.com> bcc:
Subject: RE: GISList: Section 508 Question -
16/08/2001 Visual disabilities and maps
00:42
Stepping way out on this thin limb, I'd like to make a few observations.
First, not being a lawyer, my comments are simply that, comments, not
facts,
not authoritative in any way.
It seems while this poses a quandary for the internet community, I am not
certain that there could ever be a solution that meets everyone's needs. I
doubt very much that the architects of the ADA and similar legislation ever
envisioned these issues when drafting the Act. It would be impossible to
forecast and predict such a "requirement". So, the question has to be
asked, where does the line get drawn? Part of the art & science of
cartography is making an attractive looking "picture", which happens to be
a
map, that attempts to convey some information. This art follows some basic
principles in terms of color selection, combinations, etc. To say that
this
would need to be abandoned or significantly altered to accommodate those
that are color-blind, or red/green, would be inventing a new, albeit highly
specialized discipline within cartography. Not that it couldn't happen,
but
then what? Do company's maintain two versions of every map product? Are
color-blind consumers willing to pay more for their "specialized" products?
Should they have to?
In reading some of the reference materials posted (no way am I going
through
all of that!), some suggest that graphic images need to have accompanying
text sufficient to convey the image's message. Well, pardon the
expression,
but that's a hell of a lot of text for some of these web-mapping
applications and products! Even if a picture is worth only a 1000 words,
then how many storage servers will it take to convey in text the
information
contained in maps on the Geography Network? Far fetched? Not to the
ambulance chasers.
To draw the logical conclusion from your comments below, those
cartographers
(mapmakers) and GISers that are not using color-blind-friendly colors are
in
violation of the ADA. While I doubt the legality of such a proposition, it
points to the basic premise, where does it end? The ADA was instituted to
deal with people not having equal access to sidewalks, restrooms,
restaurants, theatres, parking spaces, offices for work, etc. We still do
not have 100% compliance with these basics, how on earth can we even
suggest
to tackle the topic of equal "access" on the WWW, when the very nature of
the WWW changes, quite literally, on a daily basis. Furthermore, the USDOJ
ruled that it considers the WWW a "common" area, thus putting it under the
domain of the ADA. Last time I checked, the internet wasn't an exclusive
property.
Regarding "508", those company's or organizations that do not deal with the
Feds don't seem to have much to worry about. Not sure if there are
trickle-down, Reagan-style State mandates that say the same thing or not.
Anyway, I am not sure where I was going with this, or that I have even made
a point, as I said in the beginning, just comments, and I sure s
|
