W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2002

Re: Legal requirements RE: statistics

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 07:50:30 -0500 (EST)
To: Denise Wood <Denise_Wood@operamail.com>
cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0201140747420.29073-100000@tux.w3.org>
Well, we don't know (unless we look at the contract between teh Australian
Open and IBM, which I presume is confidential) whether it was the developers,
the comissioners, or both, who changed. As far as I know the committees
organising Olympic Games are almost completely independent, and given that
Salt Lake is in another country they are not the first place I would look to
see a change in approach.

But yes, I think we agree on all the substantive points here.

On Sun, 13 Jan 2002, Denise Wood wrote:
  >I wouold like to dispute a point in this email. It was
  > suggested that the
  > Olympics case had no impact, as shown by the inaccessible
  > site prodced for
  > the Salt Lake Winter Games.
  Valid point Charles - however the attitude/change in behavior I was referring
  to was the Olympics Organising Committee. It is certainly beneficial if a
  designer/developer learns as a result of legal case, but remember HREOC
  determined that it was the commissioning body responsible not the developers
  of the site. Hence my point, we also need to bring about a change in the
  attitudes of companies and organisations commissioning web sites - not just
  the designers/developers.
  >Also, I am participating in this discussion, and I do not think that
  > legislation is the primary reason why a site should be
  > accessible - it is
  > there because there are other good reasons, and it is a good
  > way to get
  > people's attention, in my opinion.
  We have no disagreement here either Charles. My comment in the email to which
  you are responding was that "I doubt any one contributing to this discussion
  would regard legislation as the primary reason that a web site should be
  accessible" and later in my email I stated "From my experience, citing
  legislation, and even better, referring to specific test cases does at least
  get people to listen". So on both these points we agree Charles!

CMN My bad for not reading carefully enough then.


Received on Monday, 14 January 2002 07:50:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:36:06 UTC