- From: Paul Davis <paul@ten-20.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 13:09:26 -0000
- To: "keiko okada" <k-okada@mitsue.co.jp>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Here goes. And to those of you stipulating character line length... tough, I'm on a roll and naming names so sue and be dammed I quote "It is sad for me to know that they have to "force" people to understand importance of accessibility and follow this kind of regulations. " You may be sad Keiko, I weep buckets. You have to understand there is no political will to enforce the law. Just a political will to be seen to endorse the law. A horse of a very different colour. We hear sound bytes, we see no action. There is no desire commercially to adapt the internet to accessible content. The internet is market funded and thus market driven and only market forces will determine content. There are loopholes and getout clauses everywhere.....undue burden!? on whom??? This group whilst it's intentions are honorable lacks any credibility in the corporate boardroom as it has no teeth. In the UK in particular, we live in a fourth world waiting in a queue (we are good at that, us Brits) to be upgraded to third world status. Millions euros, and pounds sterling are wasted every year in projects funded by the European social fund to address this very problem, it amounts to jobs for the boys. Dial UK spent £350,000+ social fund money to update a database and build an accessible website, now on attempt 3 the first 2 having failed to deliver. The whole thing could have been done for under £50,000 I know, I read the contract specifications and I was a bidder in the contract, then failed in my bid as I was too cheap. Too cheap!!!??? I would have cleared £20,000 on the contract. It also transpired that the consultant who wrote the specifications was also advising the Board then later assisted with the contract...OUCH! They failed to understand/misadvised the database (the largest single cost in the successful bid) did not have to be re wrtten and put into windows format, it would sit quite happily on a server in it's existing state/format and be accessed by every office countrywide over the internet. Time taken to do this? A morning at best. But then this was also the organisation that spent £1 million for a report by an international audit house. The resulting infomation nearly all of which could have been found at the local library, which is where the audit house got the info...I spoke to one of the researchers. Aghh...... Show me a single accessible website that is owned and run by a large (over 2000 employees) commercial company, that does not require at best the viewer to alter/adapt their text reader software? The law my friends is an Ass. Justice is only for those in the corporate world that can afford it. Everthing else is window dressing. I'm off to drown worms. Paul Davis
Received on Tuesday, 9 March 2004 08:09:32 UTC