6 ms·

Norway to force some websites to follow usability guidelines

15 points by Aqwis 13y ago

Aqwis 13y ago
As far as I understand, the law forces every Norwegian business which primarily communicates with its users through its web page (which includes all sorts of businesses) to follow the 35 specific usability guidelines. The policy will be in effect from July 1. In my eyes, this is complete and utter madness, which will heavily discourage Internet entrepeneurship in Norway. Would you found a web startup if you were forced to hire a compliance consultant or professional web design firm in order to not break the law? Some more information here: http://translate.google.no/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aftenposten.no%2Fokonomi%2FTvinger-alle-virksomheter-til-a-skaffe-seg-nye-nettsider-7526952.html%23.U0Aogvl_spU&edit-text= http://translate.google.no/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev...
- dalke 13y ago
  A solution to your objection is that other countries should follow suit, so everyone has a similar requirements. For example, the US proposes similar requirements for public web sites. See http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201304&RIN=1190-AA61 http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=20130... and commentary at http://www.practicalecommerce.com/articles/58946-U-S-Proposes-ADA-Compliance-for-Ecommerce-Websites http://www.practicalecommerce.com/articles/58946-U-S-Propose... . As the latter points out, "In 2012 the National Association of the Deaf filed a suit against Netflix, insisting the company provide closed captioning for its Internet video subscribers. The federal judge in the case became the first to rule that the ADA’s accessibility requirements apply to Internet-only businesses. Netflix agreed to caption all of its content by 2014." Since the US ADA law already applies to public web sites, rules would help clarify what "public website" means, and what level of support is sufficient. That seems to be similar to what Norway is doing, only Norway is a bit ahead of the US.
  - Aqwis 13y ago
    How do you start web businesses without massive investments under regimes like that? Imagine that I wanted to start a video website, say a competitor to Vimeo or YouTube. Under rules similar to these, I would have to provide closed captioning for every video uploaded by users (!), which would be utterly impossible to do. Another hypothetical: I have created a piece of software that I want to sell. To let customers buy it, I want to create simple a website for my product, but now I have to adhere to a whole bunch of super-specific guidelines. Not being an experienced web designer, I would either have to hire an expensive web designer which could possibly cost more than I profit off my product, or break the law.
    - dalke 13y ago
      That web site says "Solutions that are not covered by the regulations are ... Social media such as blogs, Facebook and Twitter spent in the private context. ... television media, including movies and network television." A YouTube competitor sounds like it would fall under one or both of those exemptions. A hypothetical for you: you want to sell quilts that you made yourself, and use the living room of your house to show and sell the quilts. But now that you're open to the public, you need to adhere a whole bunch of guidelines, like wheelchair access. You'll either have to hire an expensive carpenter or break the law. I use this to point out that your example isn't unique to a web site, but is generally true of any accessibility requirement. That's why (looking around a bit) "There is an exemption from the requirement for universal design, if this causes an "undue burden" for the business, see § 13 subsection." Or in Norwegian: Det er gjort unntak fra kravet til universell utforming, dersom dette medfører en «uforholdsmessig byrde» for virksomheten, jf.§ 13 tredje ledd. You'll have to track down what that means. In the US context, that usually means that a single person with a small web site - or someone selling quilts from their home - is not subject to the same ADA requirements as, say, NetFlix.
  - maxharris 13y ago
    A solution to your objection is that other countries should follow suit, so everyone has a similar requirements. How does this help startups, which are often building things speculatively? That is, they're not even completely sure if the things they're working on will pan out for anyone. Your solution is just to hobble everyone, and that strikes me as incredibly unjust. Everyone is born with different abilities. Some of us are able to do some things, and others of us are not. That's just a fact about the world, and it will always be that way. Where we differ is what that fact means. You are relying on the premise that those of us that possess a given ability are born in hock, in a sense, to those that do not possess that ability. It's exactly this idea that I don't accept. Now, I don't mean that we shouldn't have audible crosswalks on public streets, wheelchair ramps on government buildings, etc. Nor do I mean that it's wrong for people to privately work on assistive technologies, such as screen readers, closed captioning, etc., if that's something they wish to do. What I am against is the idea that I, or anyone else, owes part of their lives (creative works are a huge part of a person's life) to redress someone else's misfortune, inability or disability, which they had absolutely no hand in creating themselves. In the debate on "equality," some say that the only way to make us all truly equal is to hobble the able. Some people find a statement like that implausible, but after reading what you say, I have yet another data point that confirms it.
- tzs 13y ago
  Which of the 35 do you think are so difficult to deal with that startups will have to hire consultants or professional web design firms to deal with? Most looked to me as things that are fairly easy to do, and fairly easy to tell if you got them right.
whatevsbro 13y ago
Next up, "Norway forces everyone to have good taste in music". This is just yet another example of the insanity of governments and the world we live in. The only way governments affect societies is through force, coercion. Any law is a command, and you will be punished for disobeying it, regardless of whether it makes any sense whatsoever.. and only a handful of people see any problems with this.
- mteinum 13y ago
  Steely Dan FTW
ds9 13y ago
Aren't HN titles supposed to be the original title? The h1 is "Krav til nettløsninger (WCAG)" / "Requirements for network solutions (WCAG)". In this case a substitution may be necessary to giv an idea of what it's about, but let's please try to be accurate. The requirements apply only to business websites, not to all websites. Regulation of business to protect the public, or in this case to provide for disabled people, is a good thing. Imposing these requirements on non-commercial, civil-society websites would be a serious abridgement of freedom of speech.
- dang 13y ago
  Indeed. This is a tough case because the original title is unclear, and the poster's title was wrong and baity. I'll change "all" to "some", at least. In cases like this, it's helpful when a user suggests a better title. Same for urls.
larsmak 13y ago
These guidelines does not apply to all websites but (and I translate) "private and government enterprises, communities and organizations that uses the web as it's main channel for distribution of information to the public". But I'd tend to agree that it's a bit far fetched to force on any kind of guidelines. That's how things play out sometimes - reminds me of how contractors here are forced to build all new houses with certain dimensions on bathrooms, halls, and kitchen to accommodate handicapped people. This again have led to higher prices of housing.
pornel 13y ago
This is based on WCAG 2, which is for accessibility, i.e. techniques intended to make pages usable for people with disabilities, but these are not requirements for "usability" in general (as in user experience/design of the page). US has a similar law that applies to Federal agencies - Section 508:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_508_Amendment_to_the_Rehabilitation_Act_of_1973 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_508_Amendment_to_the_Re...
TempleOSV2 13y ago
I am Moses. the eleventh commandment is not to litter. God said His temple was 640x480 16 color. God said single audio voice (can have waveforms) God says... C:\TAD\Text\DARWIN.TXT ictly arboreal, it would perhaps have had its tail rendered structurally prehensile, as is the case with some members of the same order. Why Cercopithecus, considering its habits while young, has not become thus provided, it would be difficult to say. It is, however, possible that the long tail of this monkey may be of more service to it as a balancing organ in making its prodigious leaps, than as a prehensile organ. The mammary glands are common to the whole class of mammals, and are indispens
PeterWhittaker 13y ago
FYI, FWIW: Canadian federal web sites are subject to similar requirements - and they now have an open source toolkit to make this easier. The government site for the toolkit is probably the best place to learn more: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/ws-nw/wa-aw/wet-boew/index-eng.asp http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/ws-nw/wa-aw/wet-boew/index-eng.asp

15 points by Aqwis 13y ago

Aqwis 13y ago

As far as I understand, the law forces every Norwegian business which primarily communicates with its users through its web page (which includes all sorts of businesses) to follow the 35 specific usability guidelines. The policy will be in effect from July 1. In my eyes, this is complete and utter madness, which will heavily discourage Internet entrepeneurship in Norway. Would you found a web startup if you were forced to hire a compliance consultant or professional web design firm in order to not break the law? Some more information here: http://translate.google.no/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aftenposten.no%2Fokonomi%2FTvinger-alle-virksomheter-til-a-skaffe-seg-nye-nettsider-7526952.html%23.U0Aogvl_spU&edit-text= http://translate.google.no/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev...

dalke 13y ago
A solution to your objection is that other countries should follow suit, so everyone has a similar requirements. For example, the US proposes similar requirements for public web sites. See http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201304&RIN=1190-AA61 http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=20130... and commentary at http://www.practicalecommerce.com/articles/58946-U-S-Proposes-ADA-Compliance-for-Ecommerce-Websites http://www.practicalecommerce.com/articles/58946-U-S-Propose... . As the latter points out, "In 2012 the National Association of the Deaf filed a suit against Netflix, insisting the company provide closed captioning for its Internet video subscribers. The federal judge in the case became the first to rule that the ADA’s accessibility requirements apply to Internet-only businesses. Netflix agreed to caption all of its content by 2014." Since the US ADA law already applies to public web sites, rules would help clarify what "public website" means, and what level of support is sufficient. That seems to be similar to what Norway is doing, only Norway is a bit ahead of the US.
- Aqwis 13y ago
  How do you start web businesses without massive investments under regimes like that? Imagine that I wanted to start a video website, say a competitor to Vimeo or YouTube. Under rules similar to these, I would have to provide closed captioning for every video uploaded by users (!), which would be utterly impossible to do. Another hypothetical: I have created a piece of software that I want to sell. To let customers buy it, I want to create simple a website for my product, but now I have to adhere to a whole bunch of super-specific guidelines. Not being an experienced web designer, I would either have to hire an expensive web designer which could possibly cost more than I profit off my product, or break the law.
  - dalke 13y ago
    That web site says "Solutions that are not covered by the regulations are ... Social media such as blogs, Facebook and Twitter spent in the private context. ... television media, including movies and network television." A YouTube competitor sounds like it would fall under one or both of those exemptions. A hypothetical for you: you want to sell quilts that you made yourself, and use the living room of your house to show and sell the quilts. But now that you're open to the public, you need to adhere a whole bunch of guidelines, like wheelchair access. You'll either have to hire an expensive carpenter or break the law. I use this to point out that your example isn't unique to a web site, but is generally true of any accessibility requirement. That's why (looking around a bit) "There is an exemption from the requirement for universal design, if this causes an "undue burden" for the business, see § 13 subsection." Or in Norwegian: Det er gjort unntak fra kravet til universell utforming, dersom dette medfører en «uforholdsmessig byrde» for virksomheten, jf.§ 13 tredje ledd. You'll have to track down what that means. In the US context, that usually means that a single person with a small web site - or someone selling quilts from their home - is not subject to the same ADA requirements as, say, NetFlix.
- maxharris 13y ago
  A solution to your objection is that other countries should follow suit, so everyone has a similar requirements. How does this help startups, which are often building things speculatively? That is, they're not even completely sure if the things they're working on will pan out for anyone. Your solution is just to hobble everyone, and that strikes me as incredibly unjust. Everyone is born with different abilities. Some of us are able to do some things, and others of us are not. That's just a fact about the world, and it will always be that way. Where we differ is what that fact means. You are relying on the premise that those of us that possess a given ability are born in hock, in a sense, to those that do not possess that ability. It's exactly this idea that I don't accept. Now, I don't mean that we shouldn't have audible crosswalks on public streets, wheelchair ramps on government buildings, etc. Nor do I mean that it's wrong for people to privately work on assistive technologies, such as screen readers, closed captioning, etc., if that's something they wish to do. What I am against is the idea that I, or anyone else, owes part of their lives (creative works are a huge part of a person's life) to redress someone else's misfortune, inability or disability, which they had absolutely no hand in creating themselves. In the debate on "equality," some say that the only way to make us all truly equal is to hobble the able. Some people find a statement like that implausible, but after reading what you say, I have yet another data point that confirms it.
tzs 13y ago
Which of the 35 do you think are so difficult to deal with that startups will have to hire consultants or professional web design firms to deal with? Most looked to me as things that are fairly easy to do, and fairly easy to tell if you got them right.

whatevsbro 13y ago

Next up, "Norway forces everyone to have good taste in music". This is just yet another example of the insanity of governments and the world we live in. The only way governments affect societies is through force, coercion. Any law is a command, and you will be punished for disobeying it, regardless of whether it makes any sense whatsoever.. and only a handful of people see any problems with this.

mteinum 13y ago
Steely Dan FTW

ds9 13y ago

Aren't HN titles supposed to be the original title? The h1 is "Krav til nettløsninger (WCAG)" / "Requirements for network solutions (WCAG)". In this case a substitution may be necessary to giv an idea of what it's about, but let's please try to be accurate. The requirements apply only to business websites, not to all websites. Regulation of business to protect the public, or in this case to provide for disabled people, is a good thing. Imposing these requirements on non-commercial, civil-society websites would be a serious abridgement of freedom of speech.

dang 13y ago
Indeed. This is a tough case because the original title is unclear, and the poster's title was wrong and baity. I'll change "all" to "some", at least. In cases like this, it's helpful when a user suggests a better title. Same for urls.

larsmak 13y ago

These guidelines does not apply to all websites but (and I translate) "private and government enterprises, communities and organizations that uses the web as it's main channel for distribution of information to the public". But I'd tend to agree that it's a bit far fetched to force on any kind of guidelines. That's how things play out sometimes - reminds me of how contractors here are forced to build all new houses with certain dimensions on bathrooms, halls, and kitchen to accommodate handicapped people. This again have led to higher prices of housing.

pornel 13y ago

This is based on WCAG 2, which is for accessibility, i.e. techniques intended to make pages usable for people with disabilities, but these are not requirements for "usability" in general (as in user experience/design of the page). US has a similar law that applies to Federal agencies - Section 508:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_508_Amendment_to_the_Rehabilitation_Act_of_1973 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_508_Amendment_to_the_Re...

TempleOSV2 13y ago

I am Moses. the eleventh commandment is not to litter. God said His temple was 640x480 16 color. God said single audio voice (can have waveforms) God says... C:\TAD\Text\DARWIN.TXT ictly arboreal, it would perhaps have had its tail rendered structurally prehensile, as is the case with some members of the same order. Why Cercopithecus, considering its habits while young, has not become thus provided, it would be difficult to say. It is, however, possible that the long tail of this monkey may be of more service to it as a balancing organ in making its prodigious leaps, than as a prehensile organ. The mammary glands are common to the whole class of mammals, and are indispens

PeterWhittaker 13y ago

FYI, FWIW: Canadian federal web sites are subject to similar requirements - and they now have an open source toolkit to make this easier. The government site for the toolkit is probably the best place to learn more: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/ws-nw/wa-aw/wet-boew/index-eng.asp http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/ws-nw/wa-aw/wet-boew/index-eng.asp