- From: David Poehlman <poehlman@clark.net>
- Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 11:32:52 -0400 (EDT)
- To: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
- cc: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Perhaps the idea below should take the form of an automatic message generated to the author of a site with a link to an url that explains the benefits of compliance? Often a site developper is just getting round to understand the intricacies of a new format or a new revission of an old one as is the current condition. Annother stab at this is automatic vallidation when errors of this nature are detected with the results sent to the author or developper. Often though it might not be possible to asscertain who that might be <grin> On Tue, 16 Jun 1998, William Loughborough wrote: <snipped to target of comment> > WL:: Although I understand that this will continue to be done, it is so > unacceptable that we must (even at the risk of appearing ridiculous) say > something more like: "If both these sources are omitted, the author and > the vendor of whatever tool he used should be notified that they are in > violation of the law and that the host server owner for this web site is > urged to remove this from the Web for repair." > -- > Love. > ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE > http://dicomp.pair.com > Hands-On-Technolog(eye)s touching the internet voice: 1-(301) 949-7599 poehlman@clark.net ftp://ftp.clark.net/pub/poehlman http://www.clark.net/pub/poehlman
Received on Tuesday, 16 June 1998 11:33:42 UTC