- From: Nick Kew <nick@webthing.com>
- Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 00:23:26 +0100 (BST)
- To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- cc: Phill Jenkins <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
On Thu, 2 May 2002, Charles McCathieNevile wrote: Just to pick you up on one point: > is it reasonable to require authors to assume > that users haven't upgraded their browser in 7 years, despite the fact that > the browser they have is known to cause problems for accessibility, Yes, it is! People I know (socially) have computers ranging from an old 286 (one couple; someone conned them into paying a ridiculous amount for it) through a range of viable 486 and pentium boxes, up to my own most powerful box which is a 1996 Pentium Pro. Most of those people, including me, cannot afford to upgrade to anything more modern. Therefore anything that requires modern hardware - such as Windows or Gnome - is simply not an option. Of course, expensive solutions like JAWS have a useful role to play, but as far as the poor and disadvantaged are concerned they are, as far as I can see, of no use whatsoever. This is a developed country, albeit a poor and backward area of it. I imagine the problem must be far greater in a poorer country. -- Nick Kew Available for contract work - Programming, Unix, Networking, Markup, etc.
Received on Thursday, 2 May 2002 19:23:38 UTC