- From: Martin Sloan <martin.sloan@orange.net>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 01:28:01 -0000
- To: "'Nick Kew'" <nick@webthing.com>, "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
I would agree. An approach like this allows at least some sort of 'handrail' for designers and would be perfectly reasonable. On Tuesday, January 15, 2002 9:51 PM, Nick Kew [SMTP:nick@webthing.com] wrote: > > Rather than discussing "how applicable is/isn't SOCOG internationally?", > can I suggest a different perspective? > > Suppose a case is going to court in your country. Someone asks you to > assess the case as expert witness - maybe a real possibility for some > on this list. > > Apart from a few yessirs to the lawyers, what do you consider? > > I expect the lawyers to deal with SOCOG, so that's not my business. > I would expect to address the question: has the entity responsible for > the website in question exercised due diligence? As a key element of > this, I will assess what they've done against the best published > guidelines a competent web developer could reasonably expect to use: > the WCAG. What might be the outcome? > > If the problem arises in a failure to comply with WCAG, I will of course > have to say so. I will also ask the site owners why the site fails to > comply, and tell the court whether or not I am satisfied with the > answer (if any). > > Alternatively, if the problem has arisen in spite of full WCAG > compliance, I will expect to advise that they have indeed exercised > due diligence. > > IANAL, but it seems to me that a court in any country might very > well consider arguments based on something like the above process. > > -- > Nick Kew > > Site Valet - the mark of Quality on the Web. > <URL:http://valet.webthing.com/>
Received on Tuesday, 15 January 2002 20:40:10 UTC