Craig, thank you for your response, this is the kind of thing that I
am after, however you did quote the most controversial part of me
email without the following sentence that slightly moderated it. I do
agree that having the web 100% accessible is the goal, but what is the
best way of getting there? I assume that we are not there at the
moment and rewriting all the content already there is not that
practical.
The web is moving into many complex areas of multimedia, for example
should youtube be required by law to supply subtitles and voice-overs
on all its videos? - maybe not, but where do you draw the line? For
example there was a site I visited recently where you could control a
dodgeball cannon with a webcam in real-time, firing at people in a
warehouse somewhere in England. How would you suggest dealing with
that site?
It is clear that a publicly funded website like that for the Olympic
Games should be accessible, but are you suggesting that the same rules
should apply to a high-school student doing a website for a school
project? - again another tough line to draw. The scale of the internet
means that the Australian laws will only have a very small impact on
the internet as a whole.
Perhaps concentrating on improving assistive technology to cope with
the varied state of the internet is a better solution than trying to
improve the accessibility of websites. This would also make a lot of
the content that is currently inaccessible accessible.
Andy
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [email protected]
*******************************************************************
