I'd like to take up this thread,
and with a very broad side attack:
---------start txt:
Use a correct, HTML-compliant text browser and look at these two URLs:
http://ue.eu.int (...try to arrive at "/newsroom/" and then on)
http://presidency.finland.fi (...try to get anywhere there)
These are two locations of the most public kind, i.e. for publishing
of official documents and information of the European Union's Council of
Ministers and their (presently Finnish) presidency, in the name of all
EU-rope: "law" texts, public information for some 350m people in the
15 EU countries. *EVERY* EU-ropean citizen is entitled to have access
to this information.
However, *NOBODY* is allowed access to this information without a
license from an obscure firm called Microsoft. Because in fact, the
highest public authority in EU-rope breaks, twists, and cranks the own
public standard of www publishing (HTML, of which the EU had even
directly financed the development, and HTTP) in such disdain for the
public that only a priviledged minority is allowed to use it actually.
Look at their Web sites pages, at the code they use there - not *one*
complies with the W3C standards, not to speak of the WAI (W3C Web
Accessibility Initiative) Guidelines. Sure, some of the barriers to
accessibility are made by sheer sloppiness, plain stupidity and/or
ignorance of the official "authors" - quite an abominable record for
well-paid officials - but the Finnish "presidential" site is plain
evidence for intention: the whole construction is DONE in order to
discriminate: LOOK AT THE CODE !
THEY DISCRIMINATE CONCIOUSLY, INTENDEDLY - insistence on the public
standards is rebuffed by the institution's officials as "Neandertalian",
"primitive", at best coming from "an irrelevant market segment". And
a blind EU citizen, depending on correct www layout for text-dependent
Braille output, even cannot order the (prescribed) form for complaints
to the European Ombudsman: both the address, and the form to order the
(paper) form, are not accessible with such equipment.
This is not only a shame, for EU-ropeans, but plainly illegal (at least
to the sense of the - weak - non-discrimination clauses of the EU treaty
in force, and literally against constitutional provisions of a number of
EU states).
All conciliatory approaches had been in vain. We are confronted with
fundamentally undemocratic behaviour of people with institutionally
vested power, where only legal force of action can bring about an end
to despicable abuse.
We need to mobilise now.
We need technical knowledge - from the computer through the economical
and the juridical realms -, we need organisational and political
knowledge (and know-how!) to join all those marginalised "minorities" to
what in fact, is a majority force.
Public information, and access to to it, is at the core of democracy,
and the condition to defeat dictatorship and tyrrany - and this newest
one too which comes in a "technological" disguise of "innovation",
"progress", and with the thousands of heads of the same old dragon of
greedy power.
Heimo Claasen (Journalist) Brussels 1999-07-01
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.inti.be/hammer
35 Rue du Marteau B-1000 BRUXELLES t. (+32.2) 217 86 07
ps - this is not an "anti-Micoroft" pamphlet (they may do what they are
allowed to do legally as "market players") but very much an appeal to
act against the corruption of our own public institutions.
---------end txt
Feel free to forward, comment it, and most importantly, to act upon it.
Bernie, in an earliear post to this thread, made a very pertinent remark:
> The problem that is growing bigger every day is the fact that webmasters
> use FrontPage
In fact, "FrontPage" (from M$) and "FrontPage Express" (distributed
falsely-"free" with M$IE) should simply be forbidden: it is *DESIGNED*
to produce page layout which is non-compliant with the W3C HTML
standard and which can *ONLY* be accessed with MSIE.
Normally, and to quite some length, I'm against bureaucratic and
repressive means. But
-- considering that quite a number of web"masters" are plain stupid,
-- considering that, where these are holding official position in
public orgnisations, they are invested with the power to abuse this
position in a detrimental way, which is documented in these very
prominent examples,
I do argue in favour of a formal, repressive measure with noticeably
painful effect.
If you market a household gear that electrocutes people you are fined,
even jailed for that. If you beat up a blind person because he is
blind, you get locked in for sure. Why should some arrogant, well-paid,
techno-racist bureaucrat, slapping the whole public in the face,
should be allowed to get away with that unpunished ?!
I ask you.
heimo
To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message.
Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies.
