Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

Careful... "You vill also go on ze list!" On Thu, October 4, 2007 7:28 am, Joe Ortenzi wrote: > yes for an old site I no longer need. but been too busy fixing sites > that people actually need and use. > > fair nuff. you gonna sue me? > > > On Oct 3 2007, at 23:33, Chris Wilson wrote: > >> >> If

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

On 4 Oct 2007, at 04:33, Jim Davies wrote: Speaking only of businesses int he United States, no government entity should be telling a private business what it must do WHAT? with that one line you have just summarised all that is strange about America. Private business is above the law?

RE: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

There's one thing nobody has mentioned so far, which is Michelle Malkin is what I personally would call an extreme right-winger. She's a regular on Fox News, and she's been compared to Anne Coulter. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Malkin I find the idea that we'll drop her a polite, well-me

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

> > Speaking only of businesses int he United States, no government > > entity should be telling a private business what it must do > > WHAT? > > with that one line you have just summarised all that is strange about > America. Private business is above the law? They can do whatever > they like? >

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

even if making their site accessible to the blind costs target 0 dollars and 0 work, even if they need to just flip a button and bang - their site is accessible, it doesn't mean the law should force them to do it. what i really don't understand is why did the blind people sued target..if target do

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

On 4 Oct 2007, at 08:33, Rimantas Liubertas wrote: Speaking only of businesses int he United States, no government entity should be telling a private business what it must do WHAT? with that one line you have just summarised all that is strange about America. Private business is above the l

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

Quoting Or Golan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: First things first. I am a complete and total grammar snob; I think it is because I see myself as a designer. Punctuation is important, as is spacing and capitalisation. They do not hinder you, contrary, they promote your argument, as it makes you seem

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

Alas, it's the American way: Human rights and the constitution are vitally important (US only)- except when I'm turning a quick buck. On Thu, October 4, 2007 9:44 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Quoting Or Golan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > First things first. I am a complete and total grammar snob; I

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

Matthew Cruickshank wrote: Karl Lurman wrote: P.s A braille issue of Playboy - is it perverted that I think this is a cool idea??! You know this exists right? http://www.banterist.com/archivefiles/000305.html [link is safe for work] I'm frightened you knew that, or even thought to

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

there is a world of difference between a site I would love to redo when I have the time that was only meant as a portfolio site and one providing services to a very large population. But ultimately, I confess to having a bad site and am prepared to face the gauntlet of complaints. I am NOT

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

I thought legislature and regulation are constitutionally separate in the US? On Oct 04, 2007, at 06:01, Michael MD wrote: Speaking only of businesses int he United States, no government entity should be telling a private business what it must do and that includes telling a business it mu

Re: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

John Horner wrote: There's one thing nobody has mentioned so far, which is Michelle Malkin is what I personally would call an extreme right-winger. She's a regular on Fox News, and she's been compared to Anne Coulter. Yes I did, at 10:47am. Keep up ;-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Ma

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

RalphNader legislatively proved that you cannot "budget" the risks involved in the 70's with the famous Ford Pinto debacle. they forgot to include the bad press or legal challenge when ignoring the rights of the community. On Oct 04, 2007, at 06:24, Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote: I really h

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

Bless you Kat for a very intelligent and reasoned argument. On Oct 04, 2007, at 09:44, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Quoting Or Golan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: First things first. I am a complete and total grammar snob; I think it is because I see myself as a designer. Punctuation is important, as

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

Mike Brown wrote: [Mike - see, the problem is this guy is only a part-time web developer. If he was full-time, he'd totally have time and be able to solve the "verbalise the text into every spoken language" problem.] The funny thing for me was his later comment - someone else mentioned JAWS

Re: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

I agree, reading her blog she seems to be a knee-jerk reactionary Republican who wants government support when they get shafted and government to lay off when others accuse them of shafting. Someone earlier said she was intelligent - I find little evidence of this. On Oct 04, 2007, at 08

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

Two mistakes. As already mentioned, they do, in legislation, need to make the site accessible or at least show the attempt to, NOT to say "we don't want to so we won't". If they bar people who speak Spanish from the shop they are also being discriminatory, both to the Spanish they are barri

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

*SIGH* I know, that JAWS Activex/AD statement floored me, it really did How did he get on this list? Might be a newb like me but I though he'd know better than that. This is why it is taking me ages to recruit a LAMP developer who know who webstandards.org are and what they are for!

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

we do Chris, that's the point! Someone give Chris some glasses, he seems to be lost in some foggy soup! WE are so passionate about tthe proven improvements to he experience that we spend hours explaining it in great detail to clients and showing the FINANCIAL, BUSINESS CASE, LEGISLATIVE, COR

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

oops! Target are not offering a website to help clients. You can bet your last penny they have a website to make it easier to reach more customers and convince them to spend their money with Traget. Period! There is nothing in Target's behaviour that says they want to make life easier for

RE: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

Since I started it, I'll ask that we conclude the thread. Thanks to everyone for your input. The discussion was excellent and I now have some good ammo to use when debating this issue with others. I also see that the discussion has spread to other sites. Thanks again! >Anyone want to conclude the

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

Sorry I have to disagree some of these points. Comments among your text >> On Oct 04, 2007, at 01:56, Steve Green wrote: "can anybody help me understand where the idea that accessibility costs money comes from?" It certainly can do depending on the content of your site and the target audie

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

Please compare like with like. Target and your local grocery store are not a valid comparison. target were approached, had the issue politely explained, were shown suggestions as to how it could be fixed, were given both financial and legislative reasons to do so and decided to say no. "

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard [long]

Rimantas Liubertas wrote: I think these were mentioned in the part of the post you did not include in your quote... Interesting quoting tactics. Oh, please! Guilt by assertion? Jim Davies made no mention of taxes in his post. What he did say was: "Of course the private businesses should do

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

You are right, there is no reason in the world not to make your site accessible. It's easy and it is cheap, and it makes your site better. The question is, why should we force anyone to do it? No one makes his site non-accessible out of discriminating motives. They do it because they are either la

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

This was a warning of others on WSG - not a threat by me. To get on the list you have to respond to a post by Chris Wilson in an intelligent reasoned way. He will then make some bah-hoo comment about your Website (because he can't defend himself by intelligent reasoning). This will then be seized

RE: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

If you're doing business in a country (as in your company has offices and/or stores in that country), that country's legislation applies. P From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris Wilson Sent: 03 October 2007 23:58

RE: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

> Jermayn Parker > 1992 > that is 15 years ago :shock: > surely its time for a new updated version that includes up to date web > version of rules etc. > > If you want businesses and websites to follow these standards > they need > to be update Because, you know...they've simply been ignori

RE: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

> Julie Romanowski > Please visit Michelle Malkin's site and post your comments - > http://michellemalkin.com/2007/10/03/blind-shoppers-get-green- > light-to-s > ue-target-over-website/. It's reassuring to see the exact same idiotic views still being bandied around, most of them along the "the w

RE: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

Actually Joseph, we're in (near) total agreement. I am not arguing that these things should not be done. I do them every day and advocate to others that they should be done. I am merely saying that there is a cost associated with doing them. Accessible, standards-compliant design does cost more at

RE: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

Which takes us back to the beginning (you should now get plausible costings of non-adherence): On Wed, October 3, 2007 4:52 pm, Andrew Maben wrote: > Judge allows class action against Target Web site: > > > > This might advance the caus

[WSG] Cost of Accessibility

I've been reading the Target thread and keep wondering about the many references to the "cost of accessibility" with a focus on supplying alt attributes. In a database supported eCommerce site, it's very, very easy to put alt attributes on product images. You simply take the name of the product f

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

On Oct 4, 2007, at 12:23 AM, Michael MD wrote: Opening the door to yet more lawsuits... In 2000, Bruce Maguire's accessibility complaint against the Olympics.com website was upheld. Did this lead to a spate of "frivolous", "discriminatory" lawsuits in Australia? As none of the advocates o

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

On Oct 4, 2007, at 1:01 AM, Michael MD wrote: I think the best response to ignorance is education ... not lawsuits... But as Target chose to dismiss attempts at education? Obviously education is preferable to recourse to law, but education sometimes fails. That's how people end up in jai

Re: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

On 10/4/07, Joseph Ortenzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I agree, reading her blog she seems to be a knee-jerk reactionary > Republican who wants government support when they get shafted and > government to lay off when others accuse them of shafting. > > Someone earlier said she was intelligent - I

RE: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

> In 2000, Bruce Maguire's accessibility complaint against the Olympics.com website was upheld. > Did this lead to a spate of "frivolous", "discriminatory" lawsuits in Australia? Did it lead to any improvement in accessibility of commercial, government or hobby web sites in Australia? Did

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

On 4 Oct 2007, at 17:27, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I try to ensure my professional work is accessible, but I am far from being persuaded that legislation of this nature can ever be effective, without also being a burden on smaller sites, particularly those that are no longer actively maintaine

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In 2000, Bruce Maguire's accessibility complaint against the Olympics.com website was upheld. Did this lead to a spate of "frivolous", "discriminatory" lawsuits in Australia? Did it lead to any improvement in accessibility of commercial, government or hobby we

[WSG] Ronald Barnsley is out of the office.

I will be out of the office starting 05/10/2007 and will not return until 08/10/2007. I will respond to your message when I return. ** IMPORTANT: This e-mail is intended for the use of the addressee and may contain informati

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

Mark Harris wrote: I'm frightened you knew that, or even thought to google it... I've been waiting a while to post this again, so now will do... In a survey of attitudes and responses to audio description of TV and video, the American Foundation for the Blind found that some respondents wou

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

On 10/4/07, Matthew Cruickshank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Mark Harris wrote: > > I'm frightened you knew that, or even thought to google it... > > I've been waiting a while to post this again, so now will do... > > > > In a survey of attitudes and responses to audio description of TV and > > vid

Re: [WSG] Cost of Accessibility

Christie Mason wrote: If Target doesn't "get" how their methods are costing them sales, negatively impacting their brand, and increasing their web support costs; then should they be legislated into more profitable methods? Gday Christie, It's not about the cost nor the profitability. It's ab

Re: [WSG] Cost of Accessibility

> I've been reading the Target thread and keep wondering about the many > references to the "cost of accessibility" with a focus on supplying alt > attributes. I've often had the cost argument from people who really don't understand accessibility; or from people who have already built something an

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

> The question is, why should we force anyone to do it? Well the short answer is: because corporations won't do it without being forced. So if we want a non-discriminatory society, we have to force corporations to do good things. > No one makes his site > non-accessible out of discriminating moti

RE: [WSG] Cost of Accessibility

Katrina Replies ..Let's face it, inaccessibility is basically very bad manners. Most manners are socially re-enforced, however, when manners degrade beyond a certain point, then they are legislated against, for example, jay-walking, swearing, vandalism, theft, etc. That's what we are talking abo

RE: [WSG] Cost of Accessibility

Christie wrote: . . . > > It's very, very difficult to defend the Target site, it's an unusable mess > so I don't use it, but Target does have the right to have a bad site. > Not if they lose this case, they don't. Kerry -

RE: [WSG] Cost of Accessibility

-Original Message- From: Ben Buchanan Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 10:35 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Cost of Accessibility I believe web accessibility is in society's best interests. Companies should be forced to do it, just as they are forced (at least in .au)

RE: [WSG] Cost of Accessibility

Christie wrote:> > It's very, very difficult to defend the Target site, it's an unusable mess > so I don't use it, but Target does have the right to have a bad site. > Kerry Not if they lose this case, they don't. Christie Then they will still have to the right to have a bad, accessible site. -

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

Andrew Maben wrote: > > On Oct 4, 2007, at 12:23 AM, Michael MD wrote: > > Opening the door to yet more lawsuits... > > > In 2000, Bruce Maguire's accessibility complaint against the > Olympics.comwebsite was upheld. Did this lead to a spate of "frivolous", > "discriminatory" lawsuits in Australi

Re: [WSG] Cost of Accessibility

On 5 Oct 2007, at 06:02, Christie Mason wrote: No one has a "right" to shop at Target. I think that's the real point of disagreement in this whole discussion. As a society we have allowed the concept of ownership and commerce[1] and in order to enable those concepts to work we have rules a

Re: [WSG] Cost of Accessibility

On 10/5/07, Christie Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Christie wrote:> > > It's very, very difficult to defend the Target site, it's an unusable > mess > > so I don't use it, but Target does have the right to have a bad site. > > > Kerry > Not if they lose this case, they don't. > > Christie > Th

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

No but you DO have an escalator at your local shopping mall because not everyone finds the climb up the stairs easy. Or should we remove the escalators and elevators from shopping malls too because they CHOSE to go to that shopping mall didn't they? Can you please use logic and sense? On O

Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard

oops! Target are not offering a website to help clients. You can bet your last penny they have a website to make it easier to reach more customers and convince them to spend their money with Traget. Period! Don't be so ignorant. There is nothing in Target's behaviour that says they want t