Re: Accessibility - Government Controll?

[Joyce Taylor]
>I have one client whose business is computers (hardware and programming.)  I
>was explaining some points to one of this businesses' employees about
>accessibility and about certain government agencies and certain higher
>educational pages needing to be accessible.  But he said this was government
>control and should not be allowed and doesn't agree with it and felt that
>not many people who were disabled actually use the internet and oneshould be
>made to conform pages for people with disabilites.

This is not surprising to me.  It's along the same lines as my earlier
comments; some people instinctively resist control; if the government said
you had to have a pointy roof, they'd build a flat one.  Witness the FUD
response to the misguided news articles about Section 504.

Kynn's list of selfish reasons to adopt accessibility is far more
compelling, both to people like your client and to those who like
legislating The Right Thing.  Accessibility is good because more people get
your message, and if you're not trying to communicate, why do you have a
Web site?  Accessibility *is* a little more difficult than not - because
you have to think a little bit about what you're doing.  But the cost is
small and the payoff is high.

(FWIW, Joyce, if you get another client like that, tell them I'm a
hard-core Libertarian and keep all of my Web pages accessible.  A
Libertarian friend of mine wrote a very nice article about
self-interest-motivated community development efforts, including
participation in standards and accessibility initiatives.  I can dig up the
URL if anyone wants it.)

-Chris

--
Christopher R. Maden, Solutions Architect
Exemplary Technologies
One Embarcadero Center, Ste. 2405
San Francisco, CA 94111

Received on Monday, 18 October 1999 18:46:24 UTC