Tim wrote: > Thanks Terrence, > > I tried to force change. I made a formal complaint under the Aust 1992 > Dis Dis Act stating that I had trouble using a mouse and wanted keyboard > access. The bloody dramas that caused! I complained about the > Centrelink site, but AGIMO stated that their site was near enough. The > Chief Information Officer at AGIMO last worked at Centrelink. I got > nowhere and in the end withdrew the complaint or it was going to be > struck out by Human Rights who accepted advice from the Aust government > department AGIMO that another government department Centrelink was W3C > close enough and would be updated anway, so go away. > > If I were blind, I would have had a better cause for keyboard access. I > could not get any support from any organisations and Vision Australia > stated to me in a job interview that they preferred to work with their > clients, not beat them over the head. > > I prefer the beat them over the head approach having seen the > alternative fail so badly, but I have run out of sticks, I update a > review of Aust government websites occasionally and try to embarrass > them into action. I think they hope none notices except a few of us, > certainly there is no organisational support for an action like Maguire > v Sydney Olympics, it will take one determined individual to try and > force change. > > I'm fresh out of sticks and sick of flogging a dead horse. > > http://www.hereticpress.com/Dogstar/Publishing/AustWeb.html
Tim, Are you sure you are approaching it in the right direction ? Now most, if not all the sites you list, would involve some form of CMS merely because of economies of scale involved. So who therefore is at fault? Is it: a) the organisations themselves who may get bad advice b) the advisors who give them that advice in regards to CMS infrastructure c) any or all in-house web staff, who may or may not be attempting to retrofit that CMS to do the job that is required by those organisations ? d) the solution providers who pitch the CMS as part of the sale, and then offer next to no warranty or support in regards to web standards ? e) some or all of the above, and if so, why? f) something/someone else? <Other> fits here Retrofitting is a bad methodology to work with, especially when you're dealing with version control inside a CMS, but in some ways that's most of the coalface stuff that I've seen from my area of the industry (CMS management). Forced change, by nature, will be opposed. People first have to see the value of an idea to increase the nature by which they will adopt that change. -- Lawrence Meckan Absalom Media Mob: (04) 1047 9633 ABN: 49 286 495 792 http://www.absalom.biz ****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************
