W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2009

Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns

From: William Loughborough <wloughborough@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 07:01:26 -0800
Message-ID: <1e3451610902180701k692b9fa6q782572872198eb2b@mail.gmail.com>
To: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
Cc: Alexander Surkov <surkov.alexander@gmail.com>, Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
There are several possible ways to deal with what sounds like an indictment
of "Bespin guys" and maybe they don't deserve that, however history shows
that in all human/civil rights issues there are just such people - in fact
if you examine the demonstration by Tommie Smith and John Carlos at the 1968
Olympics that caused a huge uproar in "bigotworld" (which was most media and
most people then!) you will see all the unsane arguments for "separate but
equal".

This is not a "tangent", it's the central issue for the DRM (Disability
Rights Movement not Digital Rights Management!), particularly when we are
dealing with furthering the goal of W3C, including especially its founder.

We can no longer afford to sit idly by while all the gains of the last
decade in Web Accessiblity are sacrificed on the altar of "I didn't know
blind people could use the Web" thinking. Bolting on stuff is clearly
unacceptable, morally/ethically/legally and that "Chrome" was put out before
it was even minimally accessible is disgusting.

Love.

On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 6:32 AM, James Graham <jgraham@opera.com> wrote:

> Alexander Surkov wrote: But it sounds Bespin guys don't care about
> accessibility
>
Received on Wednesday, 18 February 2009 15:02:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:31 GMT