Web Accessibility

[spicy brains]

One thing that's been problematic about IP.Board is that it's not always very accessible. For instance, there it doesn't come with any audio CAPTCHA alternatives. We've been getting some complaints from some of our members that our CAPTCHA in member registration has made it impossible to register without assistance because we're not accessible.

[Mark]

Audio captcha has been discussed before... There was a mod made for it, but I think IPS said it wouldn't be included as a default feature.

[Carl M]

Vb are using this in the next update, maybe IPB should take a look too

http://recaptcha.net/

[bfarber]

That doesn't solve the audio problem/suggestion though.

[Keith J. Kacin]

What about non-English speakers? Would there be audio versions of the CAPTCHA for all languages?

[Digi]

Audio capcha is the least of IPB's worries imo. Take this page alone for instance:

(hope these links work)
WAI Checklist
Section 508

I've not run it on every page, but IPB is about 50/50 on pass fail for each test. Regardless, using the translations isn't really a valid argument because, just like language files, the community will fill the void. :)

[bfarber]

Note, however, that Section 508 technically only applies to the federal government and not to individuals.

[Digi]

Yeah yeah, but it's something to strive for :P

[Carl M]

It reads out a set of numbers if you click for an audio challenge.

What does your current system do instead........erm............

[elj]

Note, however, that Section 508 technically only applies to the federal government and not to individuals.

And W3C standards are only standards and there's nothing binding you to them, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't strive to meet them, does it? :)

[Digi]

I think you meant "recommendations" (even less binding :P)

[Adam Kinder]

And W3C standards are only standards and there's nothing binding you to them, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't strive to meet them, does it? :)

Section 508 and the W3C are completely different. Federal applications and contractors are required by law to pass accessibility standards if it's a task in your contract. In the private sector no one cares if you use <font> instead of <span> or break a HTML rule. Otherwise Microsoft would be out of business :P

508 compliance would be a 'nice to have' in IPB, but it's not a show stopper.

[elj]

Fair point. :D