W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2000

RE: Memorandum from Paul Taylor wrt ADA and the Internet

From: Jamie Fox <jfox@fenix2.dol-esa.gov>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 11:33:35 -0500
Message-ID: <01BF6403.5C3ACC60.jfox@fenix2.dol-esa.gov>
To: "'Kelly Ford'" <kford@teleport.com>
Cc: "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
I think the problem here is for private individuals making web sites that 
must conform.  Constitutionally it would be the equivalent of demanding 
that all notes on postcards be written with good grammar.  I imagine it 
should not be a major legal problem to force private companies to use 
electronic curb cuts.  The scope is at issue not the principle.

-Jamie Fox

-----Original Message-----
From:	Kelly Ford [SMTP:kford@teleport.com]
Sent:	Friday, January 21, 2000 11:10 AM
To:	w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject:	Re: Memorandum from Paul Taylor wrt ADA and the Internet


I'd be curious to know why you are so against legal action to compell
improved web accessibility?  While I certainly don't think it is the first
approach, in many cases the force of law is the best method to compel 

I've watched the web grow more and more inaccessible as time goes by.  This
probably isn't a popular opinion but all the guidelines, standards and such
seem to have little impact on the web's development.

Show me an e-commerce site that's been hurt by inaccessibility.  Obviously
these sorts of sites will be hard to find because who knows how many
transactions have been lost when someone found a transaction too difficult
to complete.  But I don't see too many e-commerce vendors running around
saying, "Gee, if I incorporate accessibility I'll make more money."
Received on Friday, 21 January 2000 11:33:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:07 UTC