Re: General Exception for Essential Purpose

At 06:21 AM 10/27/00 -0400, Leonard R. Kasday wrote:
>chilly font doesn't support the essential purpose of the page

And who decides that this is the case. I could well argue that the 
"essential purpose" of this page is to prevent citizens from venturing 
forth in bad weather and that it has been found that this particular means 
of reminding them of that is the difference between them (particularly 
those of advancing years) noticing that it's going to be cold and getting 
frostbite because you didn't have those "nice icicly" letters.

I think the guidelines need to be as absolute as other "laws" like the 
Mosaic tables. There need to be "exception tables" in the explanatory 
materials much as "if the only available food is milk-boiled mutton, the 
concern for life trumps the dietary laws."

I think it is an absolute rule that you must not use "text-as-text" in 
graphics format. Exceptions are obviously going to be taken, but not 
without consequence, including failure to meet some conformance level. If 
this leads to someone questioning why the "icicle font" presence didn't 
preclude the author's claim of AAA conformance the ensuing hearing/trial 
would get to decide if the author was reasonable in deciding to: use the 
font; claim conformance because of a "reasonable exception".

We are able to be "draconian" in our requirements/recommendations because 
it is quite clear from our statement about conformance: "Content providers 
are solely responsible for the use of these logos". If a designer can claim 
AAA conformance in good conscience then only some arbitrator (probably 
armed with "case law" and the "exception table") can decide if the claim is 
justified.

We need not temporize in these matters so long as we try to clarify what 
are permitted "exceptions".

--
Love.
                 ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE

Received on Friday, 27 October 2000 06:39:23 UTC