- From: John Foliot - WATS.ca <foliot@wats.ca>
- Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 09:48:38 -0500
- To: "'Kelly Pierce'" <kpierce2000@earthlink.net>, "'david poehlman'" <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>, "'John Carpenter'" <John.Carpenter@pdms.com>, "'wai-ig list'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Kelly Pierce wrote: > > **Perhaps a better example is the local gas station not > selling ethanol or > alcohol-based fuels and instead only offering petroleum-based fuels. Sorry Kelly, that's not the same thing. Some financial institutions offer the Visa Credit Card, others MasterCard, and perhaps others both, neither or something else (Discover Card?). Don't confuse product offerings with client service. I may not be able to get a Visa card at one institution, but then I get to choose to either a) live with it and get MasterCard instead, or b) switch banks. But the institution *does* offer - to every client - the ability to apply for a credit card. However, if I went to the bank and was told that only brown eyed clients could get a Visa card, that blue eyed clients needed to get colored contact lenses to apply... > My > nearest gas station doesn't sell ethanol, only two stations > in Chicago do. Right, but again as long as those 2 stations sell ethanol products to all drivers - not just those that drive American model cars... > My bank doesn't support anything but Internet Explorer, but > since there is > an accessible alternative, What is the alternative? To me, to continue to bank with that institution you *MUST* have Internet Explorer installed if you want to do on-line banking. What is the alternative? Don't do on-line banking? That's accessible?... > this isn't discrimination > according to the law. <snip> > **this is more a societal discussion rather than a disability > one. Exactly. The biggest issue is those institutions which think that as long as they meet the "technical" requirements, their obligations end there. They see it as an "obligation", as opposed to the "right thing to do". The purpose of this type of legislation is to try and mold society to one which is more inclusive, less discriminatory - fairer. To me, the bottom line is this: nobody has conclusively proven why the institution *cannot* make their site accessible to other browsers. I know my bank's on-line banking site "works" in other browsers, so there is existing proof that it *can* be done... I suspect that if ever it went before the courts, a strong case could be made against the bank in question. JF -- John Foliot foliot@wats.ca Web Accessibility Specialist / Co-founder of WATS.ca Web Accessibility Testing and Services http://www.wats.ca 1.866.932.4878 (North America)
Received on Wednesday, 2 February 2005 14:48:54 UTC