- From: keiko okada <k-okada@mitsue.co.jp>
- Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 10:03:04 +0900
- To: "'David Woolley'" <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
David, > No contractor and particularly no government contractor will >code for accessibility without them. I know but that's not what I meant, David. My point was, who are the experts here? It sure is good to have a standard you can refer to when you need help, but should it be ruled by the government? I'm afraid, some things, especially good things, tend to be ignored when government comes to rule. I'm not talking only about any possible punishment or budgets to be involved here. What are the reasons it should be government ruled? Don't get me wrong though I am not talking about wheather or not it should be. I just want to know why you think it should be, if you think it should. If anyone thinks it shouldn't, I want to hear his/her opinions too. *smile* Keiko ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------- Keiko O. http://www.mitsue.co.jp/ -----Original Message----- > So what are the benefits of having regulations on IT accessibility, No contractor and particularly no government contractor will code for accessibility without them. > especially if they are not followed? Well written guidelines and They meet your international obligations, e.g. for the UK to meet EEC legislation, and therefore you can claim that everyone is on a "level playing field". > Then if you do have regulations on IT accessibility to be respected, > should they be "punished" for not following the regulations? Please If you didn't have prescriptive rules, but relied on the customer's judgement of accessibility, most big government contractors would not want to bid; they do not want contract completion, and therefore payment, to be at the whim of the customer.
Received on Tuesday, 9 March 2004 20:03:00 UTC