

Re: accessible banking:

From: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 23:25:53 +0000 (GMT)
Message-Id: <200502032325.j13NPsv06788@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org

> Why are we dealing so much in legal arguments anyway. This is an
> accessibility list, not a law or even activism list.

Law is an issue because the average business (small or large) only
does anything about accessibility when forced to by law.
There are, of course, niche businesses in the market of providing
tools to work around general inaccesibility.

It's always been an activism list; there is an element of activism in
many W3C lists.  As I perceive it even the original concept paper for
the web was based on the concept of universal access (not in the limited
disability sense) to information and the ability to publish it, not on
what just was commercially profitable.

In some ways, this list is actually unusual in permitting how-to 

For the narrow definition accessibility people on the list (those who
probably perceive of themselves as not being activists) law is particularly
important, because for them the legal definition of disability defines
the scope of the list.
Received on Friday, 4 February 2005 07:26:02 GMT
