W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > November 2007

Re: Proposal of @ua

From: David E. Ross <david@rossde.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2007 07:50:01 -0800
Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20071124075001.01232038@mail.iswest.com>
To: www-style@w3.org

On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 18:51:51 -0800Brad Kemper <brkemper@comcast.net>
wrote in part [referring to browsers]: 
> I have to prioritize and concentrate my efforts where I see the 
> most need, and one of the big 3 or 4 that account for 99% of the 
> traffic comes out with  a new version then I know that more and 
> more of the thousands of page views on my company's sites will be 
> using the newer version.  

This may easily exclude specialized browsers that are adaptive for
the handicapped.  Target Corp is being sued in U.S. District Court
for violating the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) because its
on-line shopping Web site cannot be used by audio browsers that are
used by the blind.  

The first step in that lawsuit is an appeal by Target to determine
whether the ADA applies to commercial activities on the Web.  If the
ADA does apply, then any business that creates a Web site that
excludes (or merely ignores) specialized browsers is at risk.  This
risk will exist even if the specifics of the lawsuit means that
Target eventually wins.  

The message here is that browser-specific and platform-specific
commercial Web sites -- concentrating on only the 3 or 4 most widely
used browsers -- may indeed be illegal.  


David E. Ross
<http://www.rossde.com/>.  

Don't ask "Why is there road rage?"  Instead, ask 
"Why NOT Road Rage?" or "Why Is There No Such 
Thing as Fast Enough?" 
<http://www.rossde.com/roadrage.html>
Received on Saturday, 24 November 2007 15:50:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:56 GMT