Speaking of ' logical fallacy'.... On 10/3/07, Breton Slivka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > These are some of the worst analogies I've ever seen. The target > website is not a work of art, it's not a mountain, it's not a car, > it's not a drive up ATM, it's not a building. > > Not to mention the slippery slopes, like "Well if they force Target to > fix their website, next they'll be forcing it on ALL websites > everywhere!" and "Well if they force target to make their site > accessable to blind people, what's next? People who can't speak > english?" > > It's amazing how much these things sound like arguments, and seem to > make sense, but every one of them is a logical fallacy of some kind. > > What we are talking about here, is a Catalog of products, using a > technology which is inherently easy to make accessable. It does not > require a huge investment of material. The catalog in this case, is > used for online purchasing, or making purchasing decisions before > entering a physical store. We're not talking about a grand visual > experience, or a masterpeice of literature here, or any other such > thing which would allow arguments about freedom of speach, or > expression. Target is a business, and they ain't in the business of > making art. > > We are talking about a business that, despite one of the comments on > that blog, HAS made a concious decision to exclude a portion of the > populace from using their website. I know this because I've seen the > reasoning before. "Who cares about blind people? they're a small part > of the population anyway. Let's just make the whole thing flash." > > So we're talking about target conciously discriminating against a > portion of the populace from purchasing goods from their store, or > finding information about their products, so they could have the > perception of saving money, by not having to hire competant web > developers. This is not a freedom of choice issue. It's an issue of > choosing the illusion of money, over people. And as we can see now, it > was a bad choice, not only because the money they could have spent on > accessiblity will now be spent on lawyers, but they also lost the > potential money from those lost customers. The money they choose truly > was illusory. > > > ******************************************************************* > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm > Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ******************************************************************* > >
******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************
