Re: Business Benefits of Accessible Web Design:

>Lisa Seeman wrote on November 01, 2001 1:27 AM:
>Unfortunately people will make the business decisions based on a cost
>analysis against potential gain. Being able to help people justified
>the cost in a true business case would be very welcome, but I do not
>see the right kind of information hear.

I think the main argument is that the cost is very low for much of the
guidelines (obviously there are expensive ones especially if you're
including multimedia ones.) and as they cost so little, and do increase
visitors and improve marketability of the site they must be worth doing.

> The aid to device
>independent is also questionable. If a company decides to be WAP
>compatible, they are better of making a WML rendering then an
>accessible one. The whole mess of mobile standard, means that xml
>basic is not necessarily the language of your directors mobile device,
>which is after all, all that seems to matter.

Ignore WAP, it's an irrelevant failure pretty much noe, however, AvantGo,
PocketIE are not, they don't get a special rendering, they get the site,
show them how it looks on a Palm, or IPaq or something, then point out
the demographic who use these devices, and talk up the "future proofing"
of the accessible techniques.

>Although CSS and good markup, does improve efficiency, I do not think
>that that is generally true. In my experience making a site
>accessible, filling in table summaries, messing around with CSS for
>the look that you want ect ect is time consuming.

CSS is surely just as time consuming as the HTML 3.2 approach to achieve
the same?

>1866 654 8680
>www.GlobalFormats.com

Irony?

Jim.

Received on Wednesday, 31 October 2001 14:49:19 UTC