I’m not entirely convinced yet. I feel better when the free markets determine what works and what doesn’t. What about a newspaper ad that has tiny print and can’t bee seen without a magnifying glass? I agree that a site built for accessibility is better. I’m not too keen on making in mandatory and subject to fines like some countries have done. One of the great things about the net is freedom, and with that comes the good (accessibility) and the bad (sites that don’t care). You have to accept both or you risk your liberty. On the other hand, businesses that are not accessible to people in wheelchairs is entirely a different story. Web accessibility seems nearer to freedom of speech and the other seems prima-facia (does not need to be argued since its so obvious). Yet, like I said, I’m not convinced. Maybe I just need it explained to me in a different way.
I’m not entirely convinced yet. I feel better when the free markets determine what works and what doesn’t. What about a newspaper ad that has tiny print and can’t bee seen without a magnifying glass? I agree that a site built for accessibility is better. I’m not too keen on making in mandatory and subject to fines like some countries have done. One of the great things about the net is freedom, and with that comes the good (accessibility) and the bad (sites that don’t care). You have to accept both or you risk your liberty. On the other hand, businesses that are not accessible to people in wheelchairs is entirely a different story. Web accessibility seems nearer to freedom of speech and the other seems prima-facia (does not need to be argued since its so obvious). Yet, like I said, I’m not convinced. Maybe I just need it explained to me in a different way.
Comment by Andrew.Net — February 16, 2006 @ 2:27 pm