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 08:52:59 -0500
Message-ID: <004501c509f7$b2fca100$6401a8c0@DAVIDPC>
To: "Kelly Pierce" <kpierce2000@earthlink.net>, "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, "'wai-ig list'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>

I'm not bob, but I would posit that it is cheaper to use free linux with 
free upgrades/updates than it is to use windows even if you are econonicly 
over advantaged.  It pays to save but the point here is really about choice 
and freedom which we do not have.

Johnnie Apple Seed

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kelly Pierce" <kpierce2000@earthlink.net>
To: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>; "'wai-ig list'" 
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 8:36 AM
Subject: Re: accessible banking:

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>
To: "'wai-ig list'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 9:19 PM
Subject: Re: accessible banking:

> Kelly Pierce wrote:
>>  Because a blind computer user can successfully
>> conduct transactions on a website with IE, they would consider that
>> effective communication and be little swayed by the arguments presented
>> here.  one does not have the right to sue for the communication method of
>> their choice, only for an effective means of independently sending and
>> receiving communications.
> What if said user could demonstrate that she doesn't have Windows, hence
> no IE? Does the fact that the OS is available for purchase count towards
> making Win/IE an effective means?
> -- 

**it depends.  Up until the last year or two justification the justification
for IE was an encryption and secure transaction argument.  While people may
have been using different browsers, they were using them on windows
platforms so they could use IE if they wanted to.  Also, if someone was
using an operating system different from windows and the Mac, such as Linux,
the barrier would be one shared by all persons with that operating system
not just people with disabilities so it would be a mainstream problem not a
disability related one.  IE and windows are accessible and widely used so
there really isn't an argument for saying that people with disabilities need
to use a different approach because of accessibility reasons, like with PDF

the issue of cost is an interesting one regarding Windows access.  The main
alternatives are the legacy DOS system and Linux.  nearly all the blind
users of Linux I have met are highly technically sophisticated and are Linux
users by choice rather than by economic necessity.  The issue of system cost
as a barrier hasn't really surfaced.  do you have some examples in mind?

Received on Thursday, 3 February 2005 13:53:41 UTC

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