- From: Ann Navarro <ann@webgeek.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1998 08:55:27 -0700
- To: David Poehlman <poehlman@clark.net>
- Cc: WAI <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
At 11:50 AM 8/19/98 -0400, David Poehlman wrote: >...if I may...? >can I get a response at two in the morning? equal access is the tagline >here. universal access if you will. I too see what you are getting at, >but all to often, it's used as a cop out. well, if you can't use pdf >then... I understand that, which is why I say that of course providing an accessible site is a *good thing*. However the assertion that is at times made that accessibility is "a right" (not just "right") can bring significant resistance to an idea that may otherwise be accepted with interest. While everyone here would be thrilled to see all web sites be accessible, there is a "real" difference between those that are legally required to be in certain jurisdictions, and those where accessibility is desirable. Not putting forth everything as "required", IMO, will bring greater acceptance. Ann --- Author of Effective Web Design: Master the Essentials Buy it online! http://www.webgeek.com/about.html Owner, WebGeek Communications http://www.webgeek.com Vice President-Finance, HTML Writers Guild http://www.hwg.org
Received on Wednesday, 19 August 1998 11:56:53 UTC