- From: David Poehlman <poehlman@clark.net>
- Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 11:11:39 -0400
- To: wai-ig list <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
since the article was also posted here: -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [webwatch] Re: Reason Magazine: Access Excess Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 12:05:54 +1000 From: "Sean Lindsay" <editor@disabilitytimes.com> Reply-To: "webwatch" <webwatch@telelists.com> Organization: DisabilityTimes.com To: "webwatch" <webwatch@telelists.com> References: <3.0.3.32.20000501081752.008f58a0@mail.teleport.com> It's disturbing to see myself quoted out of context to portray a point of view I am conpletely opposed to. Walter Olsen's article: > Sean Lindsay, editor of Disability Times, is more on > the mark when he writes that for commercial Web sites, "compliance might > mean a total overhaul of their design and publishing process." The quote was taken from one of my editorials on the subject, which was critical of the way accessibility is presented in the media, and of some disability websites. It's probably the only sentence fragment I've written that Mr Olsen could isolate to make his case. I wish he'd linked to the source article, but that wouldn't have suited his purpose. http://www.disabilitytimes.com/2000/01/31/editorial I've made the point in other articles that accessibility guidelines could easily be built into site redesigns that commercial websites undertake from time to time, greatly reducing the impact of the one-off process change. I've also strongly criticised Olsen's point of view, and his testimony to the House subcommittee, in other articles. Sean Lindsay Editor - DisabilityTimes.com News for the Worldwide Disability Community Web: http://www.DisabilityTimes.com Email: Editor@DisabilityTimes.com
Received on Tuesday, 2 May 2000 11:11:40 UTC