- From: James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>
- Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 14:11:43 -0700
- To: John Foliot <foliot@wats.ca>
- Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org, wai-xtech@w3.org, gawds_discuss@yahoogroups.com, webaim-forum@list.webaim.org
John, You are a reasonable, thoughtful individual in person, but this is list trolling. I can't pretend to know what happened inside Google during to process to launch Chrome, but I can assure you that there are numerous people inside Google that care about accessibility, and history has shown that Google is willing to fix its bugs. At acknowledge the possibility that they may have wanted and attempted to make this product accessible, and just haven't been able to do so yet. I can also assure you that launching a first version software product can be extremely difficult, it is never perfect, and features always end up on the cutting room floor. I say this because, while I share your concern for the accessibility of all products, your criticism is hardly objective or constructive. It not only evokes an aggressive tone that will hinder the probably of an honest, open response from the Google developers, it also perpetuates the stereotype that accessibility advocates are all crotchety jerks that don't understand or give heed the constraints of a realistic software development cycle. You personally know *at least* two people at Google that have designed and built their own screen readers, and who take a very strong interest in making all of Google's products and the web at large more accessible. Why not interface with them to see how they or others are are helping to fix these issues, rather than attempt to embarrass their company and undermine their efforts to fix the problems from within. James On Sep 2, 2008, at 11:44 AM, John Foliot wrote: > While we must acknowledge that Google has been scrambling since the > leak of > their impending "Chrome" web browser, it is indeed truly sad that > the "comic > book" they professionally produced and released on the web today > (www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/index.html) is nothing but a > series of > images with, guess what - no alternative text at all. > > I guess page conformance really isn't that important after all, and > that > Google's commitment to an accessible web is mostly just empty words, > as > actions really do speak louder than pictures, uhm, I mean words. > > JF >
Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2008 21:12:27 UTC