- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-hwg@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 12:23:51 -0700
- To: David Poehlman <poehlman@clark.net>
- Cc: WAI Interest Group <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
At 11:03 AM 6/3/1999 , David Poehlman wrote: >I thought it might be good for someone here to pick up on this? I got the same request through different channels -- as someone who believes that most "anti-web-accessibility" sentiment is due to either ignorance or someone simply being a jerk, it was hard for me to recommend someone who would argue persuasively that web accessibility is a bad thing. (Asking me this is sorta like asking your local catholic priest for someone who'll argue convincingly that you shouldn't go to church.) What I ended up doing was recommending that he get in touch with CNet/builder.com and ZDnet -- both have recently run articles stating how important web accessibility is (and in ZDnet's case, using Bobby to test their sites) but since those articles, they have not made any changes to their own sites. Dan Shafer specifically points this out in his article on the AWARE Center. So I suggested that he contact the web designers of those sites and ask them "if you've written that web accessibility is important and that your web site has 122 obstacles for access by disabled users (as the ZDnet site does, according to their own article), why haven't you made your site accessible?" -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@hwg.org> President, Governing Board Member HTML Writers Guild <URL:http://www.hwg.org> Director, Accessible Web Authoring Resources and Education Center <URL:http://aware.hwg.org/>
Received on Thursday, 3 June 1999 15:29:32 UTC