The legal case against “Target”:http://www.target.com/ in the US has been in the headlines again this week as a federal judge in has just granted “class action status” to the lawsuit.

Like many in the web industry, I have been aware of this case since it first came to light back in early 2006 (when a 24-year-old student, along with the “American National Federation for the Blind”:http://www.nfb.org/ filed the suit, alleging the Target Corporation is breaking the law by failing to make its website accessible and usable for the blind), but I wasn’t too clear on what this recent “class action status” meant, and what the ramifications might be.

After a little scout around the internet I’ve discovered that a “class action” is:

bq. A lawsuit brought by one or more plaintiffs on behalf of a large group of others who have a common interest. (“Answers.com”:http://www.answers.com/class+action?cat=biz-fin&gwp=13)

I guess what this means in the context of the latest ruling is that a) the judge has identified the case as genuine and significant, and b) the status will allow blind people throughout America who have tried unsuccessfully to access Target’s site to become plaintiffs in the suit.

An article entitled: “Court Ruling Says California Disabled Rights Law Applies to the Web”:http://www.nfb.org/nfb/NewsBot.asp?MODE=VIEW&ID=221, on the “American National Federation for the Blind website”:http://www.nfb.org/ states that in fact, two decisions were made during the ruling:

bq. San Francisco, California (October 2, 2007): A federal district court judge issued two landmark decisions today in a nationwide class action against Target Corporation. First, the court certified the case as a class action on behalf of blind Internet users throughout the country under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA). Second, the court held that Web sites such as target.com are required by California law to be accessible.

So what does this mean for us as web designers then? Well whether you think this kind of legislation is “right or wrong”:http://www.sitepoint.com/forums/showthread.php?t=346162, it’s certainly brought the issue of website accessibility into the public consciousness. Personally, all legal stuff aside, I think that in terms of professional web design this can only be a good thing. It highlights the importance of ensuring your website is available to as wide an audience as possible as par for the course. As Paul Boag suggests in “this article about the Target issue”:http://www.boagworld.com/archives/2006/02/target_accessibility_and_opinions.html, Website accessibility (along with standards conformity and good usability) has to become regarded as just part of what we do as good web designers, not something to be offered as an extra feature to our clients.