Re: Fwd: Why Validate?

From: Lloyd Wood (l.wood@eim.surrey.ac.uk)
Date: Mon, Sep 24 2001

  • Next message: Kynn Bartlett: "Referer validation errors"

    Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2001 12:14:09 +0100 (BST)
    From: Lloyd Wood <l.wood@eim.surrey.ac.uk>
    To: Michael Bowen <fizzbowen@mindspring.com>
    cc: www-validator@w3.org
    Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0109241213260.4797-100000@phaestos.ee.surrey.ac.uk>
    Subject: Re: Fwd: Why Validate?
    
    On Mon, 24 Sep 2001, Michael Bowen wrote:
    
    > 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.
    
    http://www.google.com/search?q=Maguire%20vs%20SOCOG
    
    not hard.
    
    L.
    
    > 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).
    
    <L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk>PGP<http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/>