This article discussed some different requirements of all government web pages for easy accessibility for people with disabilities. It includes requirements to add additional assistive technology capabilities to each government sponsored web page. Each guideline is rated on a scale of 1 to 5 in importance, followed by a rating describing how much evidence they have to support the claim. I don't know why this information was included. By saying that one of the guidelines is rated 3 with an evidence rating of 1, it makes style sheets seem almost a trivial guideline. TheWc3 piece shows that style sheets can be very effective in helping certain groups of people access the web.

I found this document to be very inaccessible, especially given the topic. There is a common phrase in many of the elements, saying something to the effect of ensure that the assistive technology can read the information. This wouldn't be a problem if a list was provided stating which languages/programs were incapable of interfacing with currentassistive technologies. None of the chapter titles address this issue. This document is making it difficult for web designers to adhere to these guidelines.

These guidelines are, however, necessary. I didn't realize that nearly 40% of all people with disabilities lived in the South (see Disability Stats and Facts). I would have been interested to know if disabilities are region-based at all. Relevant duplicate information needs to be available for those individuals who cannot engage in the web in the usual manner. I wonder if regulations like these will become mandatory for corporations, or a website like YouTube, where you would have to provide subtitles for all the video, as well as descriptions of what is occurring in the clip. This would make a lot more jobs for YouTube to get coders for their new content. This is probably why there has not been a push for this yet.