W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2004

Re: UK Businesses Reject Accessible Web Sites

From: Andy Heath <a.k.heath@shu.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 01:19:25 +0000
Message-ID: <41CB6E9D.8060707@shu.ac.uk>
To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@sidar.org>
CC: John Colby <John.Colby@uce.ac.uk>, David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org


> might seem sensible. But my experience was different - that the total cost
> of work required was not actually high. It cost less than the management
> meetings required to approve it. And the cost in following through a
> complaint is mostly time. Making company lawyers use their time on this

It seems to me that peace is always cheaper than war!

Unless of course you are a general or an arms
maker.

The difficulty with economic/business arguments
is it depends where you stand and where you draw
a line around the context .. what is the
argument for a government ? What is the argument
for a community, what is the argument for the
manager of a department ?

So what is this argument for war
(metaphorical equivalent of
avoiding doing accessibility to save money) ?
It doesn't make sense to me. If the objective of life
is to get one over on the other guy,
(avoid spending money on him, shoot him,
sell him tobacco, risk his health as an
employer ... whatever) then life
seems pretty poor.

What happened to ethical reasons for doing stuff ?
What happened to being decent to people and
not trying to screw them ?

In war we are all the poorer not just the ones
who get killed.  Why does it have to be profitable ?
  - we all live on the same planet here.

Having a world where everyone can join in is
something worth having.  Arguing about cost
is deception ;-).

andy
-- 
andy
_______________________________________________
Andy Heath
a.k.heath@shu.ac.uk
Received on Friday, 24 December 2004 01:19:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:19 GMT