RE: [WSG] Accessibility Trustmark

[michael.brockington]

This looks little better to me than an advertising piece for another (poor quality?) commercial service. I have no experience of this company, but SiteMorse are probably the leaders in this field, and have courted plenty of controversy along the way. Any testing is better than no testing, but badges appear to have as many negatives as positives. The latter point has also been extensively covered in relation to the W3C accessibility icons.   Finally, the value of a paragraph stating why the site is accessible is negligible - if it is true then who cares, and if false then of no use.   Mike From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Emma Sax Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 10:21 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] Accessibility Trustmark What are the Groups thoughts on ‘trustmarks’?    http://www.e-consultancy.com/news-blog/361985/accessibility--are-trustmarks-the-answer.html   Are they a waste of money or are they really better than in-house testing and a paragraph on how the site is accessible?   Thanks   Emma ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************