Character/Title of "root" documents?

Perhaps I'm coming late to the dance, but it seems to me that "building the 
case for Web Accessibility" isn't actually where we're at.

We've long been there and done that - the case is built and what we're 
actually about is presenting said case.

Once the policy makers have stuck their oars in and actually begun pulling 
(and this clearly isn't just a U.S. Section 508 phenomenon any longer) the 
need isn't to "build a case" but to present what we "experts" have known 
all along - without "rubbing it in". We are still to a certain extent 
behaving as if there was some significant (and even defensible?) argument 
about whether everyone/everywhere should be connected.

In the present instance for example, the tone expressed in the "may be 
important", "might benefit", "may reduce time", etc. is way too 
"cap-doffing/forelock-tugging". This is also still true in the policy paper 
and perhaps in the other suite components. There is no longer tenable 
disagreement in these matters (or won't be by the time we actually publish).

Fundamentally, the fact that there are actual on-the-books laws (call them 
regulations or whatever if it suits one's timidity) about this stuff means 
we don't need to cavil to the bigotry of ableist prejudices/misconceptions 
any longer. It is the collective will of humanity that for us to all be in 
this together demands our acknowledging that since we're all members of one 
another that the principles of the WAI charter deserve forthright 
presentation rather than the defensive posture currently presented by "it 
might help you make money after all".


It's Bad Luck to be Superstitious! 

Received on Friday, 6 June 2003 09:12:58 UTC