Next message: Lloyd Wood: "Re: Fwd: Why Validate?"
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20010924040301.031da550@pop.mindspring.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2001 04:06:59 -0700
To: www-validator@w3.org
From: Michael Bowen <fizzbowen@mindspring.com>
Subject: Fwd: Why Validate?
Nick,
Could you please provide a more detailed citation for the blind user's
lawsuit? It would be very interesting to read the specific claims and findings.
Thanks, --MB
At 01:25 2001/09/24, Nick Kew wrote:
> (2) The perceptive observation "lots of websites out there
> don't validate - including household-name companies."
>
>Do remember: household-name companies expect people to visit *because of*
>the name and *in spite of* dreadful websites. Can you afford that luxury?
>
>Even if you can, do you want to risk being on the wrong side of a lawsuit
>if your site proves inaccessible to - for instance - a disabled person who
>cannot use a 'conventional' browser? Accessibility is the law in this
>and other countries. Whilst validation doesn't guarantee accessibility
>(there is no complete substitute for common sense), it is an important
>component of exercising "due diligence". It is now just over a year
>since a court first awarded damages to a blind user against the owners
>of a website he found inaccessible (Maguire vs SOCOG, August 2000).