- From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
- Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 07:05:20 -0700
- To: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>, WAI GL <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 11 September 2001 10:02:50 UTC
9. Access for absolutely all? - If not, how to draw line At 09:17 AM 9/11/01 -0400, Al Gilman wrote: >There is a school of policy analysis we might call economic rationalism >that says one sound rule for stopping adapting the automatic means of >service delivery at the point where the cost of providing personal >assistance to deliver service to the remaining underserved is less than >the cost of upgrading the technologized service to reach this population... WL: If it's cheaper to hire a human "screen reader" (assistive techbology "wife 2.0") than to buy a software one ("JAWS 9.x") then we don't need WCAG? 12. Accessibility vs. usability WL: The use of "vs." here is weird? these are clearly members of one another. 11. Do we intend guidelines to be used by regulators and requirements-setters (e.g., in companies)? WL: Whatever the "intent" might be, this will happen - can't be stopped. We may not choose to encourage such use but intent probably is of little import. Awareness of this probability may or may not figure into the deliberations about the document's language. -- Love. EACH UN-INDEXED/ANNOTATED WEB POSTING WE MAKE IS TESTAMENT TO OUR HYPOCRISY
Received on Tuesday, 11 September 2001 10:02:50 UTC