- From: Jamie Fox <jfox@fenix2.dol-esa.gov>
- Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 11:33:35 -0500
- To: "'Kelly Ford'" <kford@teleport.com>
- Cc: "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
I think the problem here is for private individuals making web sites that must conform. Constitutionally it would be the equivalent of demanding that all notes on postcards be written with good grammar. I imagine it should not be a major legal problem to force private companies to use electronic curb cuts. The scope is at issue not the principle. -Jamie Fox -----Original Message----- From: Kelly Ford [SMTP:kford@teleport.com] Sent: Friday, January 21, 2000 11:10 AM To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org Subject: Re: Memorandum from Paul Taylor wrt ADA and the Internet David, I'd be curious to know why you are so against legal action to compell improved web accessibility? While I certainly don't think it is the first approach, in many cases the force of law is the best method to compel action. I've watched the web grow more and more inaccessible as time goes by. This probably isn't a popular opinion but all the guidelines, standards and such seem to have little impact on the web's development. Show me an e-commerce site that's been hurt by inaccessibility. Obviously these sorts of sites will be hard to find because who knows how many transactions have been lost when someone found a transaction too difficult to complete. But I don't see too many e-commerce vendors running around saying, "Gee, if I incorporate accessibility I'll make more money."
Received on Friday, 21 January 2000 11:33:50 UTC