- From: Jonathan Chetwynd <j.chetwynd@btinternet.com>
- Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 19:13:08 +0100
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
- Message-Id: <BEBB08BA-F371-11D7-92F5-0003939B5AD0@btinternet.com>
I don't know how wide spread this practice is becoming, but feel we may need to make it more clear that this practice is questionable. It reminds me of those £99 500x telescopes that fail to mention that the image will be a vague faint blob with no features, or contrast. 20-50x is probably more realistic at this price point.... WAI may need to make it more plain that an automated service cannot provide AAA approval at this time. The following example is one I came across, that would appear to be from a reputable source with serious intentions and laudable aims. http://www.charityskills.org Accessible websites - free, self-edit, Bobby AAA-approved websites with an editorial wizard that helps you create pages more accessible to the learning disabled For an example of one of our free websites, please see http://www.cianonline.org.uk/ validator.w3.org has a list of 42 errors, some are not that serious....... How do people feel about this? in particular? in general? thanks Jonathan http://www.peepo.co.uk
Attachments
- text/enriched attachment: stored
Received on Tuesday, 30 September 2003 15:02:09 UTC