W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2005

Re: accessible banking:

From: david poehlman <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 08:18:27 -0500
Message-ID: <002f01c509f2$d9ab6070$6401a8c0@DAVIDPC>
To: "Kelly Pierce" <kpierce2000@earthlink.net>, "Jon Hanna" <jon@hackcraft.net>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>

I did not claim that the bank was inaccessible I claimed that the bank and 
it is inaccessible to some other user agents.  I think there may be an isue 
to work here legally, but I was not discussing the law when I brought this 
up.  I was taking an appropriate first step to find a bank I felt it 
appropriate to do business with.  In other words, I will walk with my pocket 
book in my hand to another store and buy.  In some circles, if done right, 
the force of the dollar is mightier than the forc of law where the law does 
not conflict and in some cases, even if it does.

Johnnie Apple Seed

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kelly Pierce" <kpierce2000@earthlink.net>
To: "Jon Hanna" <jon@hackcraft.net>; <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 9:56 PM
Subject: Re: accessible banking:

From: "Jon Hanna" <jon@hackcraft.net>
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 8:22 PM
Subject: RE: accessible banking:

>> You really are raising not so much a legal argument but a
>> policy one.
> Why are we dealing so much in legal arguments anyway. This is an
> accessibility list, not a law or even activism list.

**Because David claimed that the Bank of America website was inaccessible
because it supported only Internet Explorer.  A legal settlement was reached
with the bank, which agreed to comply with Priorities One and Two of WCAG

Received on Thursday, 3 February 2005 13:18:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:30 UTC