Paul Novitski
Fri, 29 Jan 2010 14:51:52 -0800
At 1/29/2010 06:09 AM, Jason Grant wrote:
I feel there has been LOADS of 'accessibility is a must' type discussion on this list, but at the same time I feel that there is loads of arguments which are essentially 'accessibility for the sake of accessibility'. My point is that we are heading towards the times where 'relevant accessibility' is more important than 'accessibility' per se. Please have a read of my article and comment via email or on the blog itself. http://www.flexewebs.com/semantix/accessibility-does-not-matter/
Sorry, Jason, but your essay is so poorly thought out and poorly written that you've given critical readers little to work with. You're just throwing a cat into a dog pen to watch the fun, and it's not even a real cat. If you really think there are types of websites in which accessibility concerns are irrelevant, list or describe them, but really all you're doing is exposing your own lack of broad, deep, and empathetic thinking.
When accessibility matters ... * A company cares about their users
You could have stopped right there. Glumly,Paul
******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *******************************************************************