- From: Scott Luebking <phoenixl@netcom.com>
- Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 21:53:20 -0700 (PDT)
- To: charles@w3.org, mburks952@worldnet.att.net, phoenixl@netcom.com
- Cc: kynn-hwg@idyllmtn.com, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Hi, Mike Could you explain why it would be to the benefit of a company to support more than one type of browser on its intranet? Scott > Just so no one forgets, Graphics are not only important, they are not only > required for certain types of pages, but to be accessible to people with > certain disabilities graphics provide the means of providing that > accessibility. > > This is NOT a simplistic subject for any of us. However the use of "cutting > edge" technology for its own sake when something else may do better, or > requiring one type of browser throws up barriers to all kinds of people, not > just hose with disabilities. I will also add that companies that designate > one type of browser are being both lazy and stupid. I would also point out > that the way that most of the companies keep people from suing them under > the ADA is to make sure that people with disabilities know that it will a > long tough fight. The few that have jobs for the most part want to keep > them. They are afraid, it is plain and simple. Many advocates for the > disabled are harassed and bullied while on the job. > > Lets make no mistakes here, any culture that would tolerate the inclusion of > Dr. Peter Singer in the Faculty of a mainstream university like Princeton > has a long way to go when it comes to being even handed. > > Of course this is just my opinion, being a person with multiple disabilities > I wouldn t know too much about this. > > Sincerely, > > Mike Burks
Received on Sunday, 24 October 1999 00:52:56 UTC