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

[w3c-wai-ig] <none>

From: Paul Davis <paul@ten-20.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 14:34:09 +0100
Message-Id: <4.3.1.0.20001024131928.00b1e8e0@ten-20.com>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org


AH hem! (polite cough)

I'm not trying to make a sales pitch here, I just think it makes sense to
look at the overall picture in making any kind of decision like this.
Terry

PD.  oh yes you are!!!!!!!!!!!

Dick Brown wrote:
"The glossary for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 provides this
definition:
"Accessible
"Content is accessible when it may be used by someone with a disability.
"That's not the comprehensive definition you are seeking, but it's the
bottom line we need to keep in mind."

I think we ought to keep our focus on our core mission -- making the Web and
Web tools usable by people with physical and mental disabilities. That task
is tough enough -- can you imagine drafting guidelines for how to make the
Web accessible to the economically disadvantaged?

PD: Do I detect a defensive action from Microsoft here. Is this what "WE" 
need to keep in mind? or what Microsoft planned developments have kept in mind?

Please do not misinterpret me. I am actually a bit of a fan of Microsoft, 
remembering it was they who paved the way in the first place that made this 
group possible in an oblique sort of way (even if another did make the 
paving slabs!!!) It was Bill Gates who saw the real potential and 
possibilities adapted and repackaged it and pushed it like hell. And all 
the best to him. I would however point out that when it comes to being god 
like in one's approach to situations, even Caesar had a man walk behind him 
reminding him "thou art but a man, thou art but a man"


Dave Wooley wrote:

Governments probably don't care if dodgy sites remain of low accessibility!

PD: Dave, governments do not really care period. There is no mileage in it. 
Any statements from governmental circles are merely sound bytes. If they 
really cared, then having taken the time and trouble to pass a law they 
would be enforcing it. They are not, the reason being the commercial 
lobbyists carry greater weight than a few non important 
voters...........until election time that is. I would like to point out the 
well worn phrase that the Houses of Parliament is the only lunatic asylum 
in the world where the rules are made by the inmates. Besides in the UK how 
many inaccessible .gov's can you find? an easier task for you, how many 
accessible ones? maybe we should add designing for government ministers to 
the accessibility list of priorities, in the making things easier to 
understand department. It is a sad reflection on our lords and masters that 
most are now dead chuffed that they have at last got to grips with the 
principles of sending an e-mail, some can even download e-mails, the others 
still have a secretary do it for them.

I have had better results with the social services departments at local 
government levels, but then they are at the sharp end. Herts CC is very 
forward thinking here. I was impressed at a meeting I had a couple of 
months back.

The really interesting factor here is in the last few days we have got both 
IBM and Microsoft to offer comment, err... I think this is progress or 
concern or whatever.

By the way Charles will email you later. Also the defining accessibility 
challenge. Got to go out now.

smiles
Paul Davis



www.ten-20.com The UK portal site for disabled people and associated 
professionals.
Received on Tuesday, 24 October 2000 09:34:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:50 GMT