- From: Lisa Seeman <seeman@netvision.net.il>
- Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 08:12:11 +0200
- To: "Marti" <marti@agassa.com>, "WAI" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
I do not think that that is our job. We are writing guidelines for how to be accessible. Legal minds must work out how to use that information in legislation. Part of that process will be definition of formula for defining terms such as "due burden" Lisa -----Original Message----- From: Marti <marti@agassa.com> To: Leonard R. Kasday <kasday@acm.org>; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>; Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net> Date: Tuesday, January 02, 2001 12:24 PM Subject: Re: Accessibility vs. consideration X: how to handle >It seems like what we are reaching for here is something along the lines of >the "undue burden" clause in the ADA. The ADA defines undue burden in terms >of a % of cost and allows some exceptions for things like historic sites. >Can we classify the "consideration X" issues into a few broad categories >like: > undue risk to intellectual property > more than x% of the total cost of the website > ....... >marti > > >
Received on Wednesday, 3 January 2001 01:11:46 UTC