- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 22:07:52 -0700
- To: Graham Oliver <graham_oliver@yahoo.com>
- Cc: gv@trace.wisc.edu, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
At 10:32 AM 10/17/2001 , Graham Oliver wrote: >I find it interesting that an institution that has >such a strong reason to make a web site accessible >should 'choose' this level of conformance. >One of the things that I have been thinking hard about >is 'If people want to do accessibility what is in it >for them to aim for anything higher than the 'lowest >level'?' In short, it's because we haven't given them a reasonable choice in WCAG 1.0. Which means that they look elsewhere for "reasonable" and conclude (incorrectly) that it's the 508 technical standards. The sad situation described here is basically a combination of two things -- web developers being lazy and ignorant (and hating outside imposition of standards), and the perception that 508 is a valid alternative to a WCAG-based policy. Both concepts are harmful to accessibility. --Kynn -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@reef.com> Technical Developer Liaison Reef North America Accessibility - W3C - Integrator Network ________________________________________ BUSINESS IS DYNAMIC. TAKE CONTROL. ________________________________________ http://www.reef.com
Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2001 01:11:21 UTC