Centre for Internet and Society

Agenda for e-Access Meeting

sachia — 2011-08-22T12:53:56Z

Download the agenda for the 7 November 2008 meeting on e-Access.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/publications/agenda%20for%20Nov%207th%20meeting.doc.htm

Advocating for Openness: Nine Ways Civil Society Groups Have Mobilized to Defend Internet Freedom

Admin — 2017-11-26T03:58:47Z

The debate over whether the Internet is a better tool for democratic empowerment or authoritarian control misconstrues the nature of the democratic challenges of the digital age.

The blog post by Sarah Oh was published by the Center for International Media Assistance on November 15, 2017

Key Findings

Civil society groups from the Global South are leading the charge to advocate for an Internet that remains open, pluralistic, and democratic. The nine case studies highlighted in this report demonstrate various ways groups in different countries have successfully fought for policies and norms that strengthen Internet freedom and digital rights. These strategies include awareness-raising, nonviolent direct action, regional and international coalition-building, and strategic litigation.

Media freedom advocates have been at the forefront of many Internet freedom efforts.
Threats to independent media online and freedom of expression continue to mount as authoritarian regimes become more technologically savvy.
Building broad civil society coalitions around Internet rights increases the chances of long-term success.

Introduction

The debate over whether the Internet is a better tool for democratic empowerment or authoritarian control misconstrues the nature of the democratic challenges of the digital age. The Internet is not a tool, but a complex domain of “competing forces and constraints.”1 These forces are comprised of powerful businesses, states, politicians, criminal enterprises, advocacy groups: in short, all of the elements present in any democracy. But in this cyber-democracy, forces compete in part on the shifting ground of the technological and physical infrastructure of the Internet, where some players wield more power than others with an ability to mold the terrain in their favor. Authoritarian states aware of what is at stake in the evolution of the Internet are beginning to engage in long-term and well-resourced efforts to undermine the democratic rights of citizens in this more fundamental way.

In a reference to the distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks that take down a specific website, these broader efforts represent what some have called a “distributed denial-of-democracy” (DDoD) attack aimed at reducing the utility of the Internet for genuine democratic discourse. These efforts, which are coordinated and well resourced, are often more insidious, harder to detect, and have the overall effect of undermining civic engagement and overall trust in the media ecosystem.

And while the diffuse and fast-changing nature of Internet can at times make it difficult for authoritarian regimes to exert their control, the complex interplay between technology, laws, infrastructure, and socio-political factors shaping the Internet make it equally difficult for democratic actors to counteract these DDoD strategies. As an additional obstacle, the values that underpin Internet freedom can be sidelined in the forums and governing bodies that set Internet standards by the dominance in those spaces of private tech companies concerned primarily with generating profits.

Formidable though they may be, these challenges are not insurmountable. Civil society groups from the Global South are leading the charge to advocate for an Internet that remains open, pluralistic, and democratic. The nine case studies highlighted in this report demonstrate various ways groups in different countries have successfully fought for policies and norms that strengthen Internet freedom and digital rights. These strategies include awareness-raising, nonviolent direct action, regional and international coalition-building, and strategic litigation.

Each of the following case studies corresponds to one of the nine guiding principles of a Democratic Framework to Interpret Open Internet Principles. This framework was collaboratively developed by a network of civil society groups worldwide to illuminate the ways that an open Internet is essential for the functioning of democratic societies. It was inspired by the norms and standards developed by the Internet Rights and Principles Dynamic Coalition (IRPC) of the United Nations Internet Governance Forum.

The framework is an important starting point for more effective, coordinated effort to ensure that the Internet remains a welcoming place for democratic life. Its aim is to create a consensus around the values that should shape the future development of the Internet. But moreover, it also provides an avenue for understanding and sharing knowledge on the concrete strategies that can be put into practice in different contexts to make sure that the Internet remains a level playing field. The following nine examples demonstrate how citizen groups can mobilize to enshrine such democratic principles in cyberspace.

“The debate over whether the Internet is a better tool for democratic empowerment or authoritarian control misconstrues the nature of the democratic challenges of the digital age.”

1. Freedom of Expression

In the Philippines, a cybercrime law introduced in 2012 proposed increasing penalties for libel and giving authorities unchecked power to track information online. Internet freedom activists worried several provisions of the law would infringe on freedom of expression by preventing Filipinos from freely posting content on websites, and participating in online forums and discussions without fear of being blocked or facing serious penalties. In response, pro-democracy organizations from across the political spectrum joined together to challenge the constitutionality of the law. Through protests, roundtables, and capacity building activities, they raised awareness and encouraged advocacy efforts around the dangers the law posted to freedom of expression and privacy. The Foundation for Media Alternatives (FMA ), a digital rights organization founded after the fall of the Marcos dictatorship and the Philippine Internet Freedom Alliance (PIFA), a broad nationwide coalition of pro-democracy and Internet freedom advocates, were among the organizations in the front lines on the struggle. PIFA was even one of the 20 organizations to file 15 petitions to the Supreme Court about the constitutionality of the law.

Public efforts in the courts and actions in the streets contributed to the takedown of three contested provisions of the law, including provision that would allow government to block or restrict access to computer data. The Supreme Court declared these provisions unconstitutional and delayed implementation of the law. Despite public concerns about the surviving provisions, the national campaign against the cybercrime law led to a turning point for Filipino activists; it showed the power of people coming together and fighting for the importance of digital rights in the Philippines. Initially fragmented, the campaign led to a larger movement unified under the goal of protecting human rights and freedom of expression online. Thus, it took the introduction of a flawed law and active public campaigns to initiate a broader dialogue about privacy, surveillance, and digital security. Digital rights communities across Southeast Asia have been inspired by Filipino advocacy efforts, which they have understood to be an example of how to communicate the balance required between anti-cybercrime measures with fundamental rights to a public audience.

2. Freedom of Assembly and Association

Social media is an important organizing tool for journalists and advocacy groups in Uganda. Facebook, WhatsApp, and other messaging applications have been used to share political knowledge, connect leaders with supporters, and organize events — even share information about government abuses. During national ‘Walk to Work’ protests in 2011, organized to protest living costs after presidential elections, Facebook and Twitter provided a steady stream of updates from protestors, bystanders, and journalists.

Using social media, however, can have dangerous consequences for marginalized groups such as the LGBT community. The government of Uganda has been known to collect user information and prosecute individuals based on information shared on social media. Uganda is one of 76 countries where homosexuality is currently criminalized, and LGBT activists fear that their online conversations will be monitored and used against them. By posting information taken from photos and content posted on Facebook, a local tabloid exposed the identity of numerous members of the LGBT community in 2011 and again in 2014. The tabloid stories in 2011 are believed to have contributed to the killing of David Kato, a prominent gay rights activist.

Furthermore, the government has repeatedly restricted access for advocacy groups to use the Internet to share political information. In 2016, the country’s media regulator restricted the use of WhatsApp, Facebook, and Twitter to prevent the organizing of protests before presidential elections in February as the government had done before in 2011. In both cases, the electoral commission enforced the social media shut-down.

Civil society groups have responded in two ways. First, they have sought to deepen their digital security capacity. To protect against threats to journalists, LGBT organizations, and other groups have learned how to use Facebook and social media applications more securely and to implement other practices that increase their privacy. In the lead up to the 2016 election this included the use of virtual private networks (VPNs) to share information. Civil society groups spread information about how to use them through radio broadcasts. The fact that the hashtag #UgandaDecides trended on Twitter shows how they were able to spread their knowledge through local networks and connect with international media. Secondly, civil society groups built coalitions with international organizations to draw attention to abuses taking place in Uganda. In 2016, Access Now supported a coalition of groups to demand that the government stop the Internet shutdown as part of the #KeepitOn campaign.

3. Accessibility

In Nigeria, national broadband plans have overlooked rural communities, leaving them with low bandwidth and high-cost options for Internet access. This means that broadband and mobile data fees are unaffordable to many in Nigeria, especially the poor. Fixed-line broadband subscriptions cost an average of 39 percent of average income, and mobile broadband packages cost 13 percent. Given that approximately 80 percent of Nigerians earn below the poverty line ($2 a day or less), access to the Internet is out of reach and unaffordable for a majority of citizens in Nigeria.

The Alliance for Affordable Internet, a global coalition working on Internet affordability, works with Nigerian civil society leaders to raise awareness around this issue through thematic working groups. The consumer advocacy and pricing transparency working group, for instance, works closely with a coalition of Nigerian NGOs that have been leading campaigns to raise awareness about pricing and taxation policies that have been proposed in Nigeria. One proposed policy includes imposing a nine percent tax on voice, data, and SMS services to consumers. This policy would make the Internet dramatically more expensive for Nigerian consumers. Groups say they worry about the consequences of the proposed policy in an environment where farmers are forced to climb trees just to get a stable Internet connection.

Civil society leaders who are part of the coalition have worked to build a healthy dialogue between regulators, civil society, and the government. A key strategy, according to activists, has been encouraging groups to find constructive ways to work with government and leveraging the interests of each of these groups to protect and drive down costs for Nigerian consumers. They seek to build relationships with the regulator and to inform them about ways to better communicate with and engage consumer groups, such as sharing their content through social media rather than press releases. Another important learning has been identifying champions within government to work on these issues.

4. Privacy and Data Protection

In Burma, gaps in the law have left citizens vulnerable when it comes to privacy and data protection. Restrictions on privacy have eased since the country’s transition from military rule, but a lack of data protection laws and general lack of awareness around privacy and data protection present significant challenges for protecting an open Internet.

Messaging applications such as Viber and Facebook Messenger, for example, are the de-facto tool for communication for activists and are used to organize political events and activities. Cheaper than voice calls, far more accessible than landlines, and easier to use than email, these tools are the primary way people in Burma communicate. Activists have received harsh penalties for sharing content that may be viewed as threatening state security. These applications are often not secure, making it possible for Burma state authorities or agents of the state to intercept their conversations. During a crackdown on student protests in March 2015, mobile phones were taken by police. Activists worried at the time that information on these phones would eventually be used against them.

Observing the need to protect activists and educate them about data protection, activists in 2016 formed a coalition, Digital Rights MM. The coalition, led by Phandeeyar, Myanmar Center for Responsible Business, Myanmar ICT for Development, and Free Expression Myanmar, has led a national conversation on the issue. Drawing on expertise from the region and international organizations, 22 local Burma-based organizations have been successful in pointing out gaps when it comes to privacy and freedom of expression in the national telecommunications law, a comprehensive law that oversees the development of the telecommunications sector in Burma. They also participated in meetings with the government and launched a public facing campaign #ourvoiceourhluttaw pushing to amend 23 articles, including one on lawful interception of data.

“Messaging applications such as Viber and Facebook Messenger, for example, are the de-facto tool for communication for activists and are used to organize political events and activities.”

5. Personal Safety and Security

In Pakistan, women face threats of physical, sexual, and psychological harassment online. Leaking explicit photos and threats of blackmail are growing increasingly more common. From 2014 to 2015, more than 3,000 cybercrimes were reported to the Federal Investigation Agency and of those cases, nearly half were targeted to women on social media. Observers estimate far more cases go unreported. In fact, in workshops conducted by the The Digital Rights Foundation, many female college students reported that they did not know cyber harassment was a crime.

Online platforms are an important space for political engagement, expression, and mobilization in Pakistan. Thus, online harassment directly impacts the political participation of women, including female journalists and women politicians. In 2016 the Digital Rights Foundation established a Cyber Harassment Helpline that women can reach out to for help when they are harassed on the Internet. One of the main objective of the helpline is to help bridge the trust deficit between survivors and law enforcement agencies. An analysis of more than 400 cases showed that the most common barriers to equal participation are non-consensual use of information, impersonation, account hacking, black mailing, and receiving unsolicited messages; the most targeted groups include women, children, human rights defenders, and minority communities. The Digital Rights Foundation has also been leading efforts to strengthen legal protections for women and responding to survivors by recommendations to law enforcement agencies and the government. Pakistan has a National Response Centre for Cybercrime, but it has faced challenges serving women outside of major cities.

6. Inclusion

In India, the population of people with disabilities is estimated to be as high as 150 million people, and the recorded rates of those who are vision-impaired are among the highest in the world. Indian digital rights advocacy groups, like the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) have worked to ensure that these individuals are able to participate fully online by promoting policies that prioritize accessibility. These include the National Policy on Universal Electronics Accessibility, the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, and Guidelines for Indian Government Web (GIGW), which all require government information be shared in formats that are accessible. Advocacy groups, however, have successfully shown that policies alone are not enough and have taken action to ensure persons with disabilities have access to critical resources and information online.

Mobile phones in particular are a vital portal to access government services, but mobile applications remain largely inaccessible to many people with disabilities, especially those with vision disabilities. For example, CIS observed in 2015 that the MyGov, the Indian Government’s mobile citizen engagement platform and the Prime Minister’s application was highly inaccessible: screens cannot be navigated by visually impaired users and can also not be read using a screen reader. Based on this, CIS with other advocacy organizations worked on framing accessibility guidelines for mobile applications recommended to the Government of India as a standard. Advocacy groups, such as the National Centre for Promotion of Employment for Disabled People (NCPEDP), have also been appealing to the private sector to ensure products designed to serve these needs are affordable and readily available to people with disabilities. They appeal to Indian companies and policymakers by advocating for the universal appeal of assistive technology to ensure disabled communities are not left behind.

Sustained advocacy, new legal mandates applied to public and private sectors, and increased research in this domain have helped advance the issue of accessibility of mobile applications. The country’s National Informatics Centre has set up a committee to revise the GIGW to bring them up to speed with international standards.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/news/cima-sarah-oh-november-15-2017-openness-nine-ways-civil-society-groups-have-mobilized-to-defend-internet-freedom

Accessible websites could become a reality

sachia — 2011-04-02T16:17:26Z

Article by L. Subramani in the Deccan Herald, 11 February 2009

Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), a Bangalore-based NGO that researches on Internet's influence on families and individuals, had reported that about 99 per cent of government websites have failed in meeting with the accessibility guidelines issued by W3C (World Wide Web Consortium).

As Kanchan Pamnani speaks about web accessibility, she relates to us an old story learnt at school. A crane called his long-time friend, a wolf, for dinner and showed a tall, narrow jar that had delicious fishes in it. Unable to put its head inside and eat, the bewildered wolf returned home hungry, as the crane enjoyed putting its long beak inside the jar and tasted its content.

“What’s the point in information being available on the Internet? The visually challenged can’t access the content all the same, since the design and presentation of websites are not friendly to the screen reader software they use to access them through PC and laptops. And they need this the most, since it saves their time and energy when they get things done online,” Ms Pamnani said.

Despite being home to the world’s largest visually impaired population, the problem of inaccessible websites has been common in India. What hurts Ms Pamnani, a visually challenged lawyer and folks like her is the irony that several website developers in India comply with accessibility norms while creating websites for their foreign clients for fear of their product getting rejected and ignore the same while making sites for home-based organisations.

Some months ago, Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), a Bangalore-based NGO that researches on Internet's influence on families and individuals, had reported that about 99 per cent of government websites have failed in meeting with the accessibility guidelines issued by W3C (World Wide Web Consortium). It had highlighted CMC Velore, RBI and IIMB as some of the institutions whose websites are either too difficult or impossible for persons with visual impairment to access with their special screen reading software.

“Someone has to take responsibility for this situation,” Pamnani mentioned. “Given that people from the IT community have created these websites, they will have to take the blame.”

Screen readers, which the blind use to get content of a computer in voice, comprises of text to speech engine (a sort of virtual larynx) and the software that allows users to interface with the system. However, graphically rich webpages or features that are primarily visual in nature become a potential minefield to the screen reader since it doesn’t know how that information can be rendered “readable” to the TTS engine.

Mindful of this bottleneck, the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), which play the role of rule-makers in the way the web functions, designed a set of guidelines web developers must use while creating websites. For instance, it calls for giving heading levels which makes screen reader users to press “Shift and the number key depending on which heading level (one to five) they want to reach” and straight away go to the heading instead of going line by line.

For webpages to be fully accessible, the guidelines ask developers to use HTML tags and create alternative, verbally described pages (to the graphically rich ones) that can be read by screen readers. Probably fearing the labour it takes, developers of websites are alleged to be overlooking the guidelines and disability activists say that the negligence is proving to be too costly for them.

“These days, most of the government documents are available on the Internet,” said Javed Abidi, Chairman, National Centre for Promotion of Employment for Disabled Persons (NCPEDP). “The technology is available and there is also the necessary awareness, but web developers seem to be taking this issue too lightly.”

Abidi and Pamnani have been talking about the situation with NASSCOM and were close to hosting a Dharna in front of the venue where the industry body was hosting its leadership summit on Wednesady. However, the protest was called off since NASSCOM agreed to focus on the issue.

“As a first step, the body has agreed to make their own website accessible,” Abidi, the New Delhi-based, wheelchair-bound disability activist, said. “Then they have agreed to urge their members to follow suit. Also, despite their attempts to take up accessibility as a CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) issue, we want them to consider this as a rights issue, since the United Nations Convention for Rights of Persons With Disability (UNCRPD), which India has signed and ratified, states (in article 9) that access to information is a right.”

So Pamnani and several other visually challenged users of the Internet feel the day when they can log on to the website of an online store and purchase anything of their choice isn’t far away.

-----

To read the article at the Deccan Herald website, click here.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/accessible-websites-could-become-a-reality

Accessible Mobiles Table PDF

praskrishna — 2011-08-22T12:47:35Z

pdf

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/publications/accessible-handsets-table.pdf

Accessible Mobile Handsets in India: An Overview

praskrishna — 2012-12-14T10:29:30Z

Over a thousand mobile handsets are sold in India today and new models are launched almost every few weeks. However, the number of accessible handsets continues to be disproportionately low. The Centre for Internet and Society conducted a research on the mobile market to gauge how many handsets in India are accessible for persons with disabilities. Handsets were judged on the basis of a few common accessibility features and pricing.

The findings reveal that 108 handset models came with screen readers and 100 were magnifier compatible. Thirty one of them were touch phones and only 15 models had QWERTY keypads.

The study found that the price of 60 of the available options was either high or very high (Rs. 10,000 and above) and only 48 handsets are available at a reasonable or low price.

For available handset options for persons with disabilities, click below:

PDF [612 kb]
Open Office [24 kb]
Word [42kb]

Some of the major cross platform and proprietary mobile operating systems were also examined for their accessibility features. These included Windows Mobile, iPhone for Apple, Blackberry, Android, Symbian and Windows Phone 7. All the operating systems offer features such as font customization, menu style, menu icons and voice recognition. However, only two offer built-in screen readers and only one OS offers a built in screen magnifier. Three operating systems support third party screen readers and two also support third party screen magnifiers.

The table [click on the links below] (also compiled by Mukesh Sharma) provides more details on the features offered by various operating systems:

Word [14 kb]
PDF [16 kb]
Open Office [15 kb]

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/accessible-mobile-handsets

Accessible ICT Procurement

pranesh — 2016-05-09T14:48:49Z

Today in India there is an excellent opportunity to address the needs of persons with disabilities through accessible ICT procurement. There is a growing body of evidence globally to demonstrate that governments are successfully using accessible procurement as a means of ensuring the human rights of persons with disabilities,. They are amongst the largest purchasers of IT in any country and by requiring accessible products and services, ensure that all citizens with disabilities and government employees who are disabled are able to access and use public infrastructure and communication. CIS along with 20 other organisations petition the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment, Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Information Technology to bring in accessibility considerations within the draft Procurement Bill.

To
The Secretary,
Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities (DEPwD)
Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment,
Room No: 525, 5^th Floor,
Paryavaran Bhawan, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road,
New Delhi - 110003

The Secretary
Ministry of Finance
North Block, New Delhi- 110001

The Secretary
Ministry of Information Technology
Electronics Niketan, 6,
CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi - 110003

Dear Sir/ Madam,

Subject: Urgent opportunity to address the needs of persons with disabilities through accessible ICT procurement in the draft procurement bill.

We are a group of organisations working to protect and promote the rights of persons with disabilities in India. You may be aware that persons with disabilities are the world’s largest minority, comprising over a billion persons of the world population as of 2011. We give below some important points which outline the need to consider accessible procurement for your consideration:

Demographic need: As per the census of India in 2011, there are 2.21 per cent or 26 million persons with disabilities living in India. However, there is an inconsistency between the estimates of the Census and the NSS surveys due to various reasons such as different definitions, different methodologies, traditional diagnostic techniques, varied reporting responses and even the 11^th five year plan opines that these numbers may be under representative and the actual number may be closer to approximately 5-6%. A World Bank report pegs the number at about 5-8% or approximately 55-90 million in India. Hence, there is a large constituency of persons with disabilities and possibly an equally large number of persons having special needs and requiring accommodations who are not necessarily identified within this group. The needs of these persons must be taken into account in order to achieve complete national development.
Need for accessible IT infrastructure: With the increasing emphasis and reliance on IT for administration, governance, communication and information through the ‘Digital India’ and ‘Smart Initiatives’, there is a need for the IT infrastructure to be accessible to enable use by all, i.e. a product or service should be usable to its maximum potential by all persons with ease and comfort irrespective of ability. For instance: Persons with disabilities cannot be given productive work in a bank if banking is not usable with the help of assistive technology; and Persons with special needs will not be able to pay bills or do banking or avail services rendered by e-governance platforms if ICT infrastructure is not usable with assistive technology. This need has already been recognized by the Government of India (GoI) through its ‘Accessible India Campaign’. Accessible ICT Procurement will be a vehicle to achieving this.
Legal imperative: India is strongly committed towards creating a barrier free world with equal opportunities and without discrimination, and facilitating enjoyment of all fundamental and human rights for persons with disabilities and complete digital inclusion. India has signed and ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) which identifies access to information and information and communication technologies as a human right and requires governments to facilitate enjoyment of these rights on an equal basis and without discrimination through various measures, such as encouraging private organisations to provide accessible services and information and provide other forms of assistance to facilitate access to information and adopting minimum standards of accessibility and design for accessibility at early stage of production to reduce cost.

Article 4(a)-(d) requires states parties to act in conformance with the convention. Accessibility is an underlying principle of the CRPD and integral for persons with disabilities to enjoy all the other human rights such as access to education, employment, assistive technologies, political participation, health, independent living and cultural materials.

India has also signed other national and international instruments in this regard, such as the Inchen strategy to make the rights real for persons with disabilities, the Marrakesh Treaty to facilitate access to published works for persons who are blind, visually impaired or otherwise reading disabled, the Biwako Millineum framework and the Biwako plus 5, enacting various legislations related to disability, including the upcoming Bill on the Rights of persons with disabilities, the National Universal Electronic Accessibility Policy and Guidelines for Indian Government Websites (GIGW) which prescribes accessibility requirements. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) – which were finalised in September 2015 and by which India is bound, also call for inclusiveness in all its goals such as education, inequality reduction, infrastructure building, economy, habitation, institutions, poverty reduction and sustainability. Hence there is a very strong legal case for implementing accessible ICT procurement, as the driver for achieving complete inclusion and participation of persons with disabilities.

Proven effective mechanism: Public procurement has been identified as a very effective tool in the hands of policy makers to implement accessibility and significant strides have been made by different countries such as USA, Australia and countries in the European Union. Statistics reveal that governments are amongst the largest purchasers of IT products and services and hence well positioned to leverage this power to ensure that all products and services developed, delivered and maintained out of public money and for the use of the public or government employees are accessible. The Government of India (GoI) is also one of the largest employers of persons with disabilities, hence the absence of accessible public infrastructure hinders efficient functioning of the government itself.
Standards for accessible ICT procurement: Today accessible procurement has proven a successful tool in the hands of policy makers and there are evolved standards in this domain. The two major standards are that of section 508 in USA and the En 301-549 (EN) in Europe. The latter is the most comprehensive and updated standard and there is a global move to develop a harmonized standard based on the EN. Hence, there is a readily available framework and standard in the form of the En for India to adopt and base its framework.

Key Global Initiatives

We’d like to draw your attention to the accessible public procurement initiative and charter launched by G3ict and to the arguments in the G3ict white paper for adoption of this policy. We strongly support the arguments made therein and recommend that GoI embrace accessible public procurement in the draft Procurement Bill of 2014. Some key points from the charter and initiative which argue strongly for the case of having an accessible ICT procurement policy in India are extracted and given below:

“Accessible procurement is relevant for the enjoyment of human rights as set out in the UNCRPD, which has been signed by 160 countries.
Public procurement accounts for 10-15% of a country’s GDP and up to 16 per cent in countries in the EU, In USA, the federal government alone purchases 25 per cent of ICTs and the purchase of the federal and state governments together account for 40 per cent of the total ICT purchases of the country.
Public procurement policy is a strong instrument to achieve digital inclusion and serves to incentivize accessible design from the start of the development process.
It strengthens the local technology industry of a country and creates positive ripple effects into the broader consumer ICT marketplace.
It develops the national accessibility ecosystem, capacity, and expertise to develop and deliver accessible products and services and lowers costs through harmonized standards & competition. It also drives the creation of new development tools for accessible technology and better accessibility training for technology professionals.”

Conclusion and Recommendations:

Access to public services and information are critical for citizens to participate in the nation building process. The development of India hinges on the progress and inclusion of all its citizens. India has already recognized the criticality of building smart cities and the need to create an accessible India. Hence, the adoption of accessible procurement falls directly within the mandate of the GoI as it is a fundamental step to achieving India’s goals. Accessible procurement is not an option, but a necessity. We hence request the GoI to take immediate steps to rectify the lapse and include accessibility as a key consideration within the procurement Bill. Accordingly, we propose the following approach for GoI’s consideration:

Preparation and circulation of a note explaining the need to include accessibility as a key component of the procurement process within the government, describing rationale, business case and best practices.
Inclusion of suitable provisions in the present draft Procurement Bill covering the following:

Identifying accessibility as a key requirement of procurement
Including definitions of accessibility and accessibility standard within the definition section. (We recommend that a national standard be adopted which is similar to or in line with the European standard EN 301-549 since it is extremely evolved and being widely adopted by countries within and outside Europe.
Requiring accessibility experts and persons with disabilities to be part of all committees set up towards implementation of the Act and procurement related processes at the central and state levels.
Including a distinct and comprehensive section in the procurement rules notified after enactment of the Act dealing with accessible procurement processes and communication which may include the following: identification of accessibility as a selection/ award criteria, inclusion of accessibility at different stages of the procurement process, such as preparatory study, pre-qualification documents, contracts for design, development, delivery and maintenance of products and services, purchase of off the shelf products, requirement of attestation and verification procedures, self-declaration by vendors, training requirements, exemption cases, transparent bidding processes to ensure inclusion of accessibility, accessible communication, and implementation and audit mechanisms.
Requiring procuring entities to include accessibility implementation within their reporting requirements.

GoI may undertake capacity building activities to raise awareness amongst procuring entities on accessibility.
GoI may draw up a plan with time lines for implementation which may be in two phases. Phase 1 may relate to setting in the process for all present and future procurement and phase 2 may relate to a plan for legacy systems which will not necessarily be replaced anew.

We would be happy to provide further inputs in this regard.

Thanking you

Yours sincerely

Mr. Pranesh Prakash
Policy Director
Centre for Internet and Society

List of Signatories

Sl. No	Name of the Person	Designation	Organisation	Email id
1	Dr. Nirmita Narasimhan	Policy Director	Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore	nirmita@cis-india.org
2	Mr. Dipendra Manocha	President	Daisy Forum of India and President, National Association for the Blind(Delhi)	dipendra.manocha@gmail.com
3	Mr. Muralidharan	Convener	National Platform for the Rights of the Disabled (NPRD)	nprd.in@gmail.com
4	Mr. Praful Vyas	Secretary	Andhjan Kalyan Trust	aktrust.drj@gmail.com prafulnvyas@gmail.com
5	Mr. Nilesh Singit	Advocacy & Research Officer	Centre for Disability Studies, NALSAR
6	Ms. Charudatta Jadhav		Techenvision	charudatta.chess@gmail.com
7	Dr. Beula Christy	HOD-Vision	Rehabilitation Centres, L V Prasad Eye Institute	beula@lvpei.org
8	Dr. Ramesh C Gaur	University Librarian	Jawaharlal Nehru University(JNU)	1. rcgaur@mail.jnu.ac.in 2. rcgaur66@gmail.com
9	Dr. Homiyar Mobedji		Bookshare	dr.homiyar@gmail.com
10	Dr. Sam Taraporewala	Director	Xavier’s Resource Centre for the Visually Challenged	sam@xrcvc.org
11	Mr. Srinivasu Chakravarthula,	Hon. Joint Secretary	The National Association for the Blind, Karnataka	srinivasu@srinivasu.org
12	Mr. K Raghuraman		Karna Vidya Foundation	raghuram.mcc@gmail.com
13	Mr. Dhanajay Bhole	Coordinator	Acc Savitribai Phule Pune university
14	Mr. Prashant Ranjan Verma	Joint Secretary	National Association for the Blind – Delhi	Pr_verma@hotmail.com
15	Mr. N S Sastry		Samrita Trust	samritatrust2006@gmail.com, norisastry@gmail.com
16	Ms. Madhu Singhal		Mitrajyothi	admin.office@mitrajyothi.org
17	Mr. Bhushan Punani		Blind People’s Association (BPA)	blinabad1@bsnl.in
18	Mr. Anil Mudgal	Secretary	Arushi	arushiorg@gmail.com
19	Ms. Poonam Tyagi	General Secretary	National Association for the Blind, Meerut
20	Dr. Vimal Dengla		National Association for the Blind
21	Mr. V S Sunder	Member	DRA India	sunder@imsc.res.in
22	Mr. Mohith B P			Bpmohith.ckm@gmail.com

[1]. Available at http://censusindia.gov.in/Census_And_You/disabled_population.aspx
[2]. Please see
http://mospi.nic.in/Mospi_New/upload/disablity_india_statistical_data_11mar2011/Chapter%204-Dimension_Disability.pdf
[3]. Available at http://www.section508.gov/
[4]. Available at
https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_en/301500_301599/301549/01.00.00_20/en_301549v010000c.pdf
[5]. Global Charter: Promoting Global Digital Inclusion through ICT Procurement Policies & Accessibility Standards, G3ict; URL:
http://g3ict.org/resource_center/g3ict_global_charter
[6]. CRPD Implementation: Promoting Global Digital Inclusion through ICT Procurement Policies & Accessibility Standards, G3ict available at: http://g3ict.org/resource_center/publications_and_reports/p/productCategory_whitepapers/subCat_7/id_339/

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/accessible-ict-procurement

Accessible Handsets Phones

praskrishna — 2011-08-22T12:47:21Z

word document

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/publications/accessible-handsets.docx

Accessible Handsets Mobile

praskrishna — 2011-08-22T12:47:53Z

open office document

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/publications/accessible-hand-sets-table.odt

Accessible Handsets

praskrishna — 2011-08-22T12:47:08Z

open office

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/publications/accessible-handsets.odt

Accessible Broadcasting in India

srividya — 2013-01-28T03:37:40Z

A report based on ITU's "Making Television Accessible Report" prepared by the Centre for Internet and Society

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/accessible-broadcasting-in-india.pdf

Accessible Broadcasting in India

srividya — 2013-01-28T05:28:38Z

The abridged version of International Telecommunication Union's "Making Television Accessible" Report which we published last year has been broadened in scope and is now called "Accessible Broadcasting in India" report.

This is an updated version of the draft that was first put up for comments on October 8, 2012. Read the full report published by ITU.

Executive Summary

Television and Radio are mediums to inform, educate and entertain. Sitting down at the end of the day and turning on the TV or radio is a rather involuntary task for many. They have become part of the fabric of almost every Indian’s life. However, there are a significant number of people in India who are unable to enjoy TV or Radio.

Television and Radio technologies have advanced at a rapid pace but accessibility of TV and Radio in India has been a persistent problem. Being mediums that are consumed through sight and sound, those with impairments in these two areas have found TV viewing and radio listening difficult or impossible. Not much progress has been made in the area of Accessible Broadcasting since the introduction of the TV “Weekly News Bulletin for the hearing impaired” in 1987.

The purpose of this report is to provide information to Indian policymakers about various TV and Radio Accessibility options available, best practices followed internationally and suggest recommendations for a brighter future in the area of Accessible Broadcasting.

This report is based on ITU’s “Making Television Accessible Report” (November 2011) by Peter Olaf Looms, Chairman ITU-T Focus Group on Audiovisual Media Accessibility. It has been adapted especially to cater to the needs and interests of India. We’d like to thank ITU for the use of this report and Peter Olaf Looms for his inputs to this abridged version.

This abridged report specifically covers:

TV Accessibility Options
Costs Involved & Bandwidth Requirements
Best Practices followed internationally
Radio Accessibility Options
Recommendations.

Download the abridged report

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/accessible-broadcasting-in-india

Accessibility Test Results: Government and Other Popular Websites

nirmita — 2011-08-17T08:50:16Z

The CIS conducted some automated accessibility tests on a few Government web sites, including that of the National Informatics Centre, and on the web sites of some banks, medical and educational institutions. This is a report of the results.

Summary

We carried out accessibility testing on the homepages of 23 sites using the automated tool at www.contentquality.com. Of the 23 sites tested, 21 failed automated verification and only the RBI and IIM-B websites passed verification on the basis of WCAG Priority 1 checkpoints. However, all 23 sites had issues with Priority 2 and Priority 3 checkpoints and failed on these criteria. Most sites also used layout tables, without linearized alternatives. Overall the sites that failed the fewest tests were RBI, IIM-B, RTI and CMC Vellore. On the additional test carried out on the quality of the alternative text, only the Ministry of HRD passed; this test was not applicable for the CMC Vellore, RBI, RTI, IIM-B and DDA sites; all others failed the test.

Even a basic automated verification tool, thus, demonstrates the deplorable state of public website accessibility in India, where all sites surveyed, except two, did not even conform to the basic accessibility criteria enumerated in the WCAG priority one checkpoints.

The section below lists the tests that most sites commonly failed; this is followed by a section with the actual test details, including information on the URL, time of test, status, browser emulated and checkpoints passed/failed.

Note:

The web content accessibility validation tool on www.contentquality.com, i.e. the HiSoftware Cynthia Says portal, is designed to identify errors in content related to Section 508 standards and the WCAG guidelines. This free tool is an online test which only validates one page at a time – the tests above were run for the homepages of the various sites and while this served as an initial automated accessibility check, this was by no means a comprehensive test for which more sophisticated tools as well as manual checking would be required.

Checkpoints

Priority 1

1.1 (a) Provide a text equivalent for every non-text element (e.g., via "alt", "longdesc", or in element content). This includes: images, graphical representations of text (including symbols), image map regions, animations (e.g., animated GIFs), applets and programmatic objects, ascii art, frames, scripts, images used as list bullets, spacers, graphical buttons, sounds (played with or without user interaction), stand-alone audio files, audio tracks of video, and video.

- RBI and CMC Vellore passed this, all others failed

6.3 (l),(m) Ensure that pages are usable when scripts, applets, or other programmatic objects are turned off or not supported. If this is not possible, provide equivalent information on an alternative accessible page.

12.1 (i) Title each frame to facilitate frame identification and navigation.

- HRD, DDA, NASSCOM, Hindu and Times of India failed. All others passed; in some cases this was not applicable.

Priority 2

7.4 Until user agents provide the ability to stop the refresh, do not create periodically auto-refreshing pages.

11.2 Avoid deprecated features of W3C technologies.

12.3 Divide large blocks of information into more manageable groups where natural and appropriate.

13.2 Provide metadata to add semantic information to pages and sites.

Priority 2 - Tables

3.2 Create documents that validate to published formal grammars.

5.3 Do not use tables for layout unless the table makes sense when linearized. Otherwise, if the table does not make sense, provide an alternative equivalent (which may be a linearized version).

Priority 2 - Forms

12.2 Describe the purpose of frames and how frames relate to each other if it is not obvious by frame titles alone.

12.4 Associate labels explicitly with their controls.

13.2 Provide metadata to add semantic information to pages and sites.

- All passed 7.4 . With regard to all the other checkpoints, some sites passed and others failed.

Priority 3

4.3 Identify the primary natural language of a document.

9.4 Create a logical tab order through links, form controls, and objects.

9.5 Provide keyboard shortcuts to important links (including those in client-side image maps), form controls, and groups of form controls.

10.5 Until user agents (including assistive technologies) render adjacent links distinctly, include non-link, printable characters (surrounded by spaces) between adjacent links.

Alternative text validation

1.1 Validate that the alt text does not use the word image When users add alternative text to an image they tend to add the word "Image" when it really says nothing about the image, but describes the object versus the meaning of the object. This check will fail a page for the use of the word image in the alternative text.

1.2 Validate that the alt text does not contain the text: .jpg, .gif, .bmp, .jpeg Many content creation tools will automatically add alternative text when you add an image to your content. The text is generally the image name. Validate that: .jpg, .gif, .bmp, .jpeg, are not found in the alt text.

1.3 Validate that the alt text does not contain the text "image" Many content creation tools will automatically add alternative text when you add an image to your content. The text is generally the image name or the word image with a number associated, like image001. This checkpoint will fail a page if the string image is found in the alternative text.

2.1 Validate that Alternative Text is greater than 7 and less than 81 characters in length Short alternative text may not be valid, warn the report user if alternative text was found that is less than seven characters in length. Additionally alternative text should not be larger than 80 characters, if the alt text is greater the long description attribute should be used. This check validates that the alt attribute does not exceed 80 characters in length.

2.2 Validate that Alternative Text is not used to repeat words Alternative text should not be used to simply hide words with the hope of increasing your ranking on search engines. If you repeat a word more than 5 times your page may not be indexed.

- Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, JNU, IITD, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, AIIMS and NASSCOM failed on all these 4 points. Other results were split, with some passes and some failures

TEST DETAILS

National Informatics Centre

Verified File Name: http://indiaimage.nic.in/

Date and Time: 11/27/2008 12:01:55 AM
Failed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

Priority 1 - Failed 1.1, 6.3;
Priority 2 - Passed 7.4, 13.1, 13.3, 12.2; Failed 11.2, 13.2, 12.4
Priority 3 - Passed 10.5; Failed 4.3, 10.5
Alt text quality – Passed 1.2, 2.2; Failed 1.1, 1.6; Warning 2.1;

Lok Sabha

Verified File Name: http://loksabha.gov.in/
Date and Time: 11/25/2008 1:11:21 AM
Failed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

Priority 1 – Failed 1.1
Priority 2 – Passed 7.4, 12.3; Failed 11.2, 13.2, 12.4,
Priority 3 – Failed 4.3, 9.4, 9.5,10.5
5.3 – used lots of tables
Alt text quality – Failed 1.1, 1.2, 1.6, 2.2; Warning 2.1

Rajya Sabha

http://rajyasabha.gov.in/

Verified File Name: http://rajyasabha.gov.in/
Date and Time: 11/25/2008 3:32:13 AM
Failed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

Priority 1 – Failed 1.1
Priority 2 – Passed 7.4, 13.1; Failed 3.2, 12.4
Priority 3 – Failed 4.3, 9.4, 9.5, 10.5
Alt text quality – Failed 1.1, 1.2, 1.6, 2.2; Warning 2.1

Ministry of Human Resources

http://education.nic.in/

Verified File Name: http://education.nic.in/
Date and Time: 11/25/2008 3:43:36 AM
Failed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

Priority 1 – Failed 1.1, 6.3
Priority 2 – Passed 7.4, 12.4, 13.1; Failed 3.2, 11.2
Priority 3 – Passed 9.5,10.5 Failed : 4.3,9.4
Alt text quality – Passed 1.1, 1.2, 1.6, 2.2; Warning 2.1

Ministry of Urban Affairs

http://urbanindia.nic.in/moud/moud.htm

Verified File Name: http://urbanindia.nic.in/moud/moud.htm
Date and Time: 11/25/2008 9:11:56 AM
Failed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

Priority 1 - Failed 1.1
Priority 2 - Passed 7.4, 13.1; Failed 3.2, 11.2, 13.2
Priority 3 – Passed 10.5 ; Failed 4.3, 9.4, 9.5
Alt text quality – Failed 1.1, 1.2, 1.6, 2.2; Warning 2.1

Delhi Development Authority:

Verified File Name: http://www.dda.org.in/
Date and Time: 11/25/2008 9:56:31 AM
Failed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

http://www.dda.org.in/

Priority 1 - Failed 1.1, 6.3
Priority 2 - Passed 7.4, 13.1; Failed 11.2, 13.2
Priority 3 – Passed 10.5 ; Warning 4.3, 9.4, 9.5
Alt text quality – N/A

Railways

http://www.indianrail.gov.in/

Verified File Name: http://www.indianrail.gov.in/
Date and Time: 11/25/2008 10:01:28 AM
Failed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

Priority 1 - Failed 1.1
Priority 2 - Passed 7.4, 13.1, 13.2, 12.4 ; Failed 3.2, 11.2
Priority 3 – Passed 4.3, 10.5; Failed 9.4, 9.5
Alt text quality – Failed 1.1, 1.2, 1.6, 2.2; Warning 2.1

Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment

http://socialjustice.nic.in/

Verified File Name: http://socialjustice.nic.in/
Date and Time: 11/25/2008 10:07:22 AM
Failed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

Priority 1 - Failed 1.1
Priority 2 - Passed 7.4, 12.4 ; Failed 3.2, 11.2, 13.2
Priority 3 – Failed 4.3, 9.4, 9.5, 10.5
Alt text quality – Failed 1.1, 1.2, 1.6, 2.2; Warning 2.1

Ministry of Law and Justice

http://lawmin.nic.in/

Verified File Name: http://lawmin.nic.in/
Date and Time: 11/25/2008 10:50:36 AM
Failed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

Priority 1 - Failed 1.1
Priority 2 - Passed 7.4, 13.1, 12.4; Failed 11.2, 13.2
Priority 3 – Passed 10.5; Failed 4.3, 9.4, 9.5
Alt text quality – Failed 1.1, 1.2, 1.6, 2.2; Warning 2.1

RTI

http://www.rti.gov.in

Verified File Name: http://www.rti.gov.in
Date and Time: 11/26/2008 3:54:10 AM
Failed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

Priority 1 – Passed 1.1, 6.3; Failed 12.1
Priority 2 - Passed 7.4, 11.2, 13.1, 12.4; Failed 3.2, 13.2, 12.2
Priority 3 – Passed 9.4, 9.5, 10.5; Failed 4.3
Alt text quality – N/A

NCERT

Verified File Name: http://www.ncert.nic.in/index.htm
Date and Time: 11/26/2008 6:22:59 AM
Failed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

Priority 1 –Failed 1.1, 6.3, 7.1
Priority 2 - Passed 7.4, 13.1, 12.4, 12.2; Failed 3.2, 13.2, 11.2
Priority 3 – Passed 10.5; Failed 4.3, 9.4, 9.5
Alt text quality – Failed 1.1, 1.2, 1.6, 2.2; Warning 2.1

JNU

http://www.jnu.ac.in/

Verified File Name: http://www.jnu.ac.in/
Date and Time: 11/25/2008 4:00:11 AM
Failed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

Priority 1 – Failed 1.1, 7.1
Priority 2 – Passed 7.4 ; Failed 3.2, 11.2, 13.1, 13.2, 12.4
Priority 3 – Failed 4.3, 9.4, 9.5, 10.5
Alt text quality – Failed 1.1, 1.2, 1.6, 2.2; Warning 2.1

IIT Delhi

http://www.iitd.ac.in/

Verified File Name: http://www.iitd.ac.in/
Date and Time: 11/25/2008 5:07:01 AM
Failed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

Priority 1 – Passed 6.3; Failed 1.1, 7.1
Priority 2 – Passed 7.4, 13.1,12.2, 12.4; Failed 11.2, 13.2
Priority 3 – Failed 4.3, 9.4, 9.5, 10.5
Alt text quality – Failed 1.1, 1.2, 1.6, 2.2; Warning 2.1

AIIMS

http://www.aiims.edu/

Verified File Name: http://www.aiims.edu/
Date and Time: 11/25/2008 10:11:37 AM
Failed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

Priority 1 - Failed 1.1, 7.1
Priority 2 - Passed 7.4,12.4, 13.1 ; Failed 11.2, 13.2
Priority 3 – Failed 4.3, 9.4, 9.5, 10.5
Alt text quality – Failed 1.1, 1.2, 1.6, 2.2; Warning 2.1

CMC Vellore

http://home.cmcvellore.ac.in/

Verified File Name: http://home.cmcvellore.ac.in/
Date and Time: 11/25/2008 10:15:44 AM
Failed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

Priority 1 - Passed 1.1; Failed 12.1
Priority 2 - Passed 7.4, 11.2, 12.4, 13.1 ; Failed 13.2
Priority 3 – Passed 9.4, 9.5, 10.5; Failed 4.3
Alt text quality – N/A

IIM Ahmedabad

http://www.iimahd.ernet.in/

Verified File Name: http://www.iimahd.ernet.in/
Date and Time: 11/25/2008 10:19:46 AM
Failed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

Priority 1 - Failed 1.1;
Priority 2 - Passed 7.4, 12.4, 13.1 ; Failed 3.2, 11.2, 13.2
Priority 3 – Passed 10.5; Failed 4.3, 9.4, 9.5
Alt text quality – Failed 1.1, 1.2, 1.6, 2.2; Warning 2.1

IIM Bangalore

Verified File Name: http://www.iimb.ernet.in/
Date and Time: 11/26/2008 6:27:18 AM
Passed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

Priority 1 - Passed 1.1, 6.3;
Priority 2 - Passed 7.4, 11.2, 12.4, 13.1; Failed 3.2, 13.2
Priority 3 – Passed 9.4, 9.5, 10.5; Failed 4.3
Alt text quality – N/A

IIM Calcutta

Verified File Name: http://www.iimcal.ac.in/
Date and Time: 11/26/2008 6:30:42 AM
Failed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

Priority 1 - Passed 6.3; Failed 1.1
Priority 2 - Passed 7.4, 12.4, 13.1; Failed 3.2, 11.2, 13.2
Priority 3 – Passed 10.5; Failed 4.3, 9.4, 9.5
Alt text quality – Failed 1.1, 1.2, 1.6, 2.2; Warning 2.1

State Bank of India

http://www.sbi.co.in/

Verified File Name: http://www.sbi.co.in/
Date and Time: 11/25/2008 10:26:29 AM
Failed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

Priority 1 - Failed 1.1;
Priority 2 - Passed 7.4, 12.4; Failed 3.2, 11.2, 13.1, 13.2
Priority 3 – Passed 10.5; Failed 4.3, 9.4, 9.5
Alt text quality – Failed 1.1, 1.2, 1.6, 2.2; Warning 2.1

Reserve Bank of India

http://www.rbi.org.in/home.aspx

Verified File Name: http://www.rbi.org.in/home.aspx
Date and Time: 11/25/2008 10:36:25 AM
Passed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

Priority 1 - Passed 1.1;
Priority 2 - Passed 7.4, 11.2, 13.1, 12.4; Failed 3.2, 13.2
Priority 3 – Passed 10.5; Failed 4.3, 9.4, 9.5
Alt text quality – N/A
http://www.rbi.org.in/commonman/English/Scripts/Home.aspx

NASSCOM

http://www.nasscom.in/Default.aspx

Verified File Name: http://www.nasscom.in/Default.aspx
Date and Time: 11/25/2008 10:47:00 AM
Failed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

Priority 1 - Failed 1.1, 6.3;
Priority 2 - Passed 7.4; Failed 11.2, 13.1, 13.2, 12.4
Priority 3 – Failed 4.3, 9.4, 9.5, 10.5
Alt text quality – Failed 1.1, 1.2, 1.6, 2.2; Warning 2.1

The Hindu

http://www.hinduonnet.com/

Verified File Name: http://www.hinduonnet.com/
Date and Time: 11/25/2008 11:00:09 AM
Failed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

Priority 1 - Failed 1.1, 6.3;
Priority 2 - Passed 7.4 ; Failed 3.2, 11.2, 13.1, 13.2, 12.4
Priority 3 – Passed 10.5; Failed 4.3, 9.4, 9.5
Alt text quality – Failed 1.1, 1.2, 1.6, 2.2; Warning 2.1

The Times of India

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/

Verified File Name: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/
Date and Time: 11/25/2008 11:22:15 AM
Failed Automated Verification
Emulated Browser: MS Internet Explorer 6.0

Priority 1 - Failed 1.1, 6.3;
Priority 2 - Passed 7.4 ; Failed 3.2, 11.2, 13.1, 13.2, 12.4
Priority 3 – Passed 10.5; Failed 4.3, 9.4, 9.5
Alt text quality – Failed 1.1, 1.2, 1.6, 2.2; Warning 2.1

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/report-of-accessibility-tests-conducted-on-some-government-and-other-popular-web-sites

Accessibility Policy Making: An International Perspective (Revised Edition 2011)

praskrishna — 2012-12-14T10:27:00Z

A G3ict White Paper researched and edited by the Center for Internet and Society, Bangalore, India. Editor: Nirmita Narasimhan, Revised edition: May 2011

In 2009, G3ict published a comparative review of the web and electronic accessibility policies of 15 countries and the European Union intended to serve as a guide to policy makers on how web accessibility has been implemented in different countries. Since then, there have been several relevant developments in the policy landscape, especially in the United States and the United Kingdom. The White Paper has been updated to keep abreast of these new changes. Some highlights of the revised White Paper include the updated version of Australia's Disability Discrimination Act Advisory Notes, issued by the Australian Human Rights Commission under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 in October 2010; the Equality Act 2010 (replacing the Disability Discrimination Act), The Statutory Code of Practice (2010), BS8878:2010 Web accessibility Code of practice replacing the PAS 78 and the e-Accessibility action plan in the U.K.; and the 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010 in the U.S.A.

The published G3ict White Paper is available here
Click here to download the White Paper [Word Document, 232 KB]

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/accessibility-policy-international-perspective

Accessibility of Political Parties Websites in India

nirmita — 2014-03-24T10:22:34Z

Given the impending elections in India across April and May 2014, a test was conducted to determine the accessibility of websites of the Election Commission of India, the Parliament and some key political parties in India. This report summarises the results of the test.

Introduction

The Internet has rapidly become a preferred medium for accessing information on various topics, ranging from politics, news, governance, recreation, business, education and carrying on social interaction. While this was initially a trend found more in urban areas, with the proliferation of the mobile phone, there is an ever expanding number of rural, elderly and illiterate persons accessing and downloading content from the Internet.

The focus shift of the government to carrying on administration and governance through electronic media and to enable G2C transactions over the Internet underscores the absolute necessity of ensuring that information and communications technologies realise their full potential as a tool for inclusion and participation. Even policymakers and parliamentarians have started using it as an effective medium to engage with the public. The Government of India has made some efforts in this direction, since it formulated Guidelines for Indian Government websites and also the recently notified National Policy on Universal Electronic Accessibility. Both of these require all Government websites and those of other entities such as essential service providers, research and academic institutions and other stakeholders to conform to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0, the universally accepted standard for measuring web accessibility formulated by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). Since inaccessibility of websites impedes access on all platforms, it is one of the most important domains of electronic accessibility.

Highlights

41 websites were tested
13 websites failed to open or had no official website address / URL
Most of the remaining 28 websites have some accessibility barriers, with only 2 websites having no known accessibility errors
The average number of errors per homepage across all tested websites is 91, with around 10 websites having more than 100 errors.
28.5% of homepages have over 500 cumulative errors
21.4% of websites have no alternate text for non-text objects
21.4% of the websites have no navigation-markup
Only 1 website has a colour change option
Around 50% of the web pages have form links of which only 50% were accessible

Click to download the full report below

as PDF
as Word file

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/accessibility-of-political-parties-websites-in-india

Accessibility of Government Websites in India: A Report

Nirmita Narasimhan, Mukesh Sharma and Dinesh Kaushal — 2012-09-26T08:16:55Z

The Centre for Internet & Society is pleased to announce the publication of a report on the accessibility of government websites in India. The report is published in cooperation with the Hans Foundation. Nirmita Narasimhan, Mukesh Sharma and Dinesh Kaushal are the authors.

Executive Summary

Website inaccessibility is the largest and most common barrier to implementing effective e-governance. In a country like India, where a very large percentage of the population is disabled, elderly, illiterate, rural, having limited bandwidth, speaks only a vernacular language or uses alternative platforms like mobile phones, having accessible websites becomes all the more important to ensure that government information and services which are available online are accessible and usable by these groups.

This report summarises the key findings of a test conducted to measure the accessibility of 7800 websites of the Government of India and its affiliated agencies against the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0, which is the universally accepted standard for web accessibility. It uses a combination of automated and manual testing to derive key findings. While the automated tool identified errors such as images without textual descriptions and HTML and CSS errors, manual testing was used wherever human decision was required, for instance, to judge whether a description of a link or image was indeed accurate, or to check for accessibility of forms.

Executive Summary

Highlights

Introduction

What is Accessibility?

Methodology

Findings and Interpretation

Known, Likely and Potential Problems
HTML and CSS Validation
Alternate Text for Non-text Objects

Recommendations

Appendix 1: Examples of Errors

Appendix 2: About the National Policy on Universal Electronic Accessibility

Appendix 3: List of Testers and Authors

Given below is the link to download the full report:

Accessibility of Government Websites in India: A Report (PDF)

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/accessibility-of-government-websites-in-india

Centre for Internet and Society

Agenda for e-Access Meeting

Advocating for Openness: Nine Ways Civil Society Groups Have Mobilized to Defend Internet Freedom

Key Findings

Introduction

“The debate over whether the Internet is a better tool for democratic empowerment or authoritarian control misconstrues the nature of the democratic challenges of the digital age.”

1. Freedom of Expression

2. Freedom of Assembly and Association

3. Accessibility

4. Privacy and Data Protection

“Messaging applications such as Viber and Facebook Messenger, for example, are the de-facto tool for communication for activists and are used to organize political events and activities.”

5. Personal Safety and Security

6. Inclusion

Accessible websites could become a reality

Accessible Mobiles Table PDF

Accessible Mobile Handsets in India: An Overview

Accessible ICT Procurement

Key Global Initiatives

Conclusion and Recommendations:

Accessible Handsets Phones

Accessible Handsets Mobile

Accessible Handsets

Accessible Broadcasting in India

Accessible Broadcasting in India

Executive Summary

Accessibility Test Results: Government and Other Popular Websites

TEST DETAILS

Accessibility Policy Making: An International Perspective (Revised Edition 2011)

Accessibility of Political Parties Websites in India

Introduction

Highlights

Accessibility of Government Websites in India: A Report

Executive Summary

Table of Contents