On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Philip TAYLOR (Ret'd) <P.Taylor@rhul.ac.uk > wrote: > > I do not use Flickr, but I do use Picasaweb, which I believe > is analogous. On Picasaweb, albums can be public or private. > Would those who seek to differentiate between public and > private facilities in terms of accessibility therefore > accept that a /public/ album is /public/, and must therefore > meet all legal accessibility requirements ? > > Or else what? Flickr/Picasaweb/etc get sued? Individual users who do not provide adequate descriptions to their uploads get sued? I'm with Robert...the discussion is getting lost in areas which, in my view, have nothing to do with HTML5 itself. P -- Patrick H. Lauke __________________________________________________________ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __________________________________________________________ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __________________________________________________________
Received on Thursday, 21 August 2008 02:16:01 UTC