- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 18:48:42 -0500 (EST)
- To: "B.K. DeLong" <bkdelong@naw.org>
- cc: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
The argument does cut the other way as well. If there is an identified need for a solution which companies claim is too expensive to implement, then it will not be done until somebody demonstrates a good way to do it. In the case of speech recognition and machine translation these turned out to be remarkably difficult, and took a very long time to reach maturity. However, they are now moving from the wish list to the "well, it works ok until' list, and we can expect them to become trivial to implement at some point in the future. If we don't identify an itch, it won't get scratched. Let me just reiterate that I am not saying "all developers must be forced to everything and hang the expense". I am saying that this group's primary role is to identify the needs of a particular community, and produce guidelines describing how those needs can be met. In addition, this group has taken an approach of specifying the relative importance of meeting each of those needs, to give some guidance to developers who are trying to implement the guidelines, generally in a commercial environment where there are many factors at work as to how important each of these strategies is, which I expect will have some bearing on which problems are solved in individual products released by individual developers. Charles McCN On Tue, 9 Mar 1999, B.K. DeLong wrote: At 05:36 PM 3/9/99 -0500, Charles McCathieNevile wrote: >Enforcement of these guidelines and assessment of how much they cost a >particular manufacturer to implement are both beyond the scope of the >group as currently chartered. >There are two reasons why I feel that the cost of implementation should >remain an issue which is beyond the scope of this group. I cannot agree more with what you said. By harping on these two issue we would be limiting the amount of accessibility we could recommend authoring tools contain or produce. Especially if we use the excuse "no one will implement it due to the cost incurred." Besides, concerned individuals will always step in to help with the enforcement of standards. Look at the Web Standards Project. They've taken CSS 1 and HTML 4.0 and made the Web development community aware of how unimplemented these recommendations are. Currently, Netscape is rewriting their browser to become as compliant as possible and Microsoft has even admitted it now recognizes Web developers as a potential client and user. We should not limit ourselves because we think our recommendations will interfere with a company's cost or product-to-market schedule. If the companies do not implement our AU Recommendations, a new group will spring up to educate the public to ask for those features or buy a different product. -- B.K. DeLong 360 Huntington Ave. Director Suite 140CSC-305 New England Chapter Boston, MA 02115 World Organization (617) 247-3753 of Webmasters http://www.world-webmasters.org bkdelong@naw.org --Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org phone: +1 617 258 0992 http://www.w3.org/People/Charles W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI MIT/LCS - 545 Technology sq., Cambridge MA, 02139, USA
Received on Tuesday, 9 March 1999 18:48:47 UTC