On 10/28/06, Tony Crockford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Says the BBC:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/click_online/6090418.stm
BBC NEWS | Programmes | Click | Designing a more accessible web
please send comments to:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/click_online/6041492.stm#Email
BBC NEWS | Programmes | Click | Send us your comments
It's a really poor article altogether. The writer only interviewed *1*
person, not an expert, and clearly someone with their own bias. The
writer talked about *1* website, a completely unique example which
took *a lot* of money and work to accomplish. The writer didn't do her
research about CSS, and never mentioned section 508, valid HTML or any
of the other HTML-based accessibility/well-formedness measures. The
writer also mentioned *1* court case, and made it seem like only *1*
person has a problem with Target. That's just not how you write
articles. Throwing together all this barely related information
results in an article that is just about useless to the reader.
Roberto Scano wrote:
I will take the first sentence and turn to the article writer:
What does web accessibility mean to you?
Probably not a lot.
Exactly.
--
--
Christian Montoya
christianmontoya.com ... portfolio.christianmontoya.com
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
