Re: Accessible road maps

>> I view HTML's purpose a little differently and I believe it has 
evolved. 
>
>I see it more as having reverted to what preceded it.  People fail to
>realise that many of the things that they want scripting or styling for
>were in commercial products before HTML.

So what is your point?  Are you saying that the web is not  trying to look 
like windows software application that existed before the web?  In my 
opinion HTML started out as a simply document markup language and has 
evolved (or as you say reverted to what preceded it) to a application 
markup language.  Are not those preceding windows software applications 
considered perfectly usable by individuals with disabilities using the 
appropriate assistive technology?  Many individuals are successful 
employed using them. 

So I agree with the goal of making guidelines for how to make scripting 
compatible with assistive technologies.  Banning scripts now would be like 
banning GUIs in the early 1990's.  Where should we focus our efforts? 
Trying to tell millions of web application developers to not use scripting 
- or -  fix the one or two browsers that don't fully support the HTML 4.01 
spec? For example, would it be more cost efficient for government to fund 
the improvement of Lynx than to mandate all the web applications to revert 
to HTML 2 days?

I am also surprised at some of the "right's" arguments.  Individuals I 
talk to who have disabilities prefer to have access to what everyone else 
has access to, including web application using scripting.  Most 
individual's who have disabilities do not want to be ghettoized to use 
some other less capable web application.  Individuals who have 
disabilities NEED the faster client side scripting just like everyone 
else.  They want to come in the front door just like everyone else. 

Regards,
Phill Jenkins