Home | Policy | About | Status Reports | Meetings | Membership | Listserv | Resources | Tools | Tutorials | Forms | News | Search | Site Map
The State of Connecticut Web Site Accessibility Committee minutes for Thursday, November 4, 2004 at 1:30 p.m., at the Department of Information Technology, Room 1034, 101 East River Drive, East Hartford, Connecticut.
Introductions - Attendees
Web site reviews – Dick Hemenway
Discussion of PDF issue – All
Demo at next CPAG meeting – All
Listserv status – Kathleen
Policy status – Working Group Review
Thoughts for the future:
The State of Connecticut Web Site Accessibility Committee minutes for Thursday, April 22, 2004, at 1:30 p.m., at the Department of Information Technology, Room 1034, 101 East River Drive, East Hartford, Connecticut.
Since the State Web Site Accessibility Policy went into effect in July of 2000, the Federal Government issued the standards for Section 508 (of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973). The standards address Web-based intranet and internet information and applications (§ 1194.22). A comparison of the WCAG Priority 1 checkpoints (which Connecticut's policy incorporates by reference) and the Section 508 web accessibility standards can be found on Jim Thatcher's site at: http://www.jimthatcher.com/sidebyside.htm Jim also says: "In particular, the requirements of Section 508 do not extend to recipients of Federal funds or private businesses. There is one notable exception to this exemption. According to the ATAP site (specifically their Information Technology Assessment), "states which receive Federal funds under the Assistive Technology Act of 1998 are required by that Act to provide an assurance of compliance with Section 508. Currently all 50 states and all territories receive Assistive Technology Act dollars and all have some form of Section 508 assurance."
Also, on March 11 of this year, the Web Accessibility Initiative at the W3C published a W3C Working Draft of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0. Note: Publication as a Working Draft does not imply endorsement by the W3C Membership. This is a draft document and may be updated, replaced or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to cite this document as other than work in progress. That being said, please take a look at the draft as a potential replacement for the portion of our existing policy that references WCAG 1.0.
Please review the referenced documents and let's have a discussion at the meeting.
A number of State web sites were never reviewed and a number of sites that passed the reviews have since moved to the portal. How do we get the word out to webmasters that we are available to do reviews and that sites should be in compliance with the policy?