Content deleted Content added
→Clarification needed: new section |
Andy Dingley (talk | contribs) →WCAG Samurai: new section |
||
Line 12:
"Businesses that have an online presence should provide accessibility to disabled users. Not only are there ethical and commercial justifications[23] for implementing the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, in many jurisdictions, there are also legal reasons. If a business's website is not accessible, then the website owner could be sued for discrimination.[24]" This implies that websties must follow the WCAG, whereas I believe no law requires websties to follow the WCAG specifically, only that they are accesible to disabled users. Following the WCAG is only one way to achieve this. If there is a legal requirement to follow the WCAG, I would like to know, and if there isn't, clarification is needed. [[User:Eldomtom2|Eldomtom2]] ([[User talk:Eldomtom2|talk]]) 11:54, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
== WCAG Samurai ==
Should the WCAG Samurai links be maintained? Or should they be frozen to an archive from 2008 or so?
The WCAG Samurai site seems to have been hijacked. The content is still there, but it's now hidden behind a load of SEO sales content - which isn't even accessible.
Given the poor achievement of the WCAG generally, I'd like to see the role of the Samurai much expanded here (WCAG itself is not a good goal for reaching accesibility), but not at the cost of plugging whoever is now running the site. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|talk]]) 10:08, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
| |||