RE: UK Access Rules:

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of David Woolley
Sent: 16 October 2003 22:40
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: Re: UK Access Rules:

>> account of their disability. It's widely regarded as being applicable 
>> to web sites, although the legislation itself doesn't mention the Web. 
>> No case law
>
>The government's guidance notes include a web site as an example, although
the notes are not legally binding.
The Code of Practice is not legally binding, however a court does have a
duty to consult it if it is relevant to the case before it. It is highly
unlikely that a court would rule against something included in a code of
practice unless there were very compelling legal reasons to do so. The use
of codes of practice is becoming increasingly common (eg Data Protection,
Regulation of Investigatory Powers etc) and the whole purpose of them is to
provide advice to those subject to the legislation to help them comply and
avoid legal action.


> However my understanding (from a lay point of view) is that it is the
service provided by the web site, not the web site > itself, that is
covered, so the provision of a reasonably equivalent level of service
through alternative means may be a > valid defence (your call centre might
have to be open on Christmas day, or you might have to close the web site
down > then!)
Valid point. However it goes wider - the budget airline would have to offer
you the same airfare bought over the phone as it would online; the Internet
bank could not penalise you with less favourable interest rates for using
the telephone based service rather than the Internet based one if you
couldn't access the site.. A web site is open 24/7 - a call centre costs
money to keep open all hours when only a few people might use it.

martin.
--
Martin Sloan
e: martin.sloan@orange.net
w: www.web-access.org.uk