W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2003

Re: Using Frames - what problems do screen readers have?

From: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 22:26:08 +0000 (GMT)
Message-Id: <200311182226.hAIMQ8902777@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org

> because of security ONLY text messages are permitted, and ONLY included in
> the body of the message...

I suspect you have a conflict with the other company's lawyers.  I happened
to see some advice from one of the UK accountancy professional bodies which

- you should always have one of these horrible confidentiality/disclaimer
  notices on email;
- there is an arguable case that such a notice is only legally effective
  if the recipient is forced to see it before seeing the content, and
  that it might, therefore, be advisable to make the real content 
  an attachment.

I would speculate that the email in question was using both rules.

As far as I am concerned, such notices are often devalued by being used
in contexts like this list, and devalue email by destroying its spontaneity,
with the result that people move to "instant messaging" to get back the
original email concept.

(On the other hand, your failure to include a disclaimer, and use of the
company name as your user name in the email, has misled me, in the past,
to think that your postings are on behalf of Access Systems.  In my view
using your personal name in the From line should break the link, but
company lawyers tend to want more.  You may well be caught up in your
own company bureaucracy.  In fact, you do have a short version of the
common legal notice, although, strangely, it is only the confidentiality
part, when the "does not represent the company view" part appeared first.

I no longer post from the office, partly because of such a notice.)
Received on Tuesday, 18 November 2003 17:47:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:26 UTC