W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2000

[Fwd: [webwatch] Re: Reason Magazine: Access Excess]

From: David Poehlman <poehlman@clark.net>
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 11:11:39 -0400
Message-ID: <390EF02B.3685F3E5@clark.net>
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: <>

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.

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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:35:56 UTC