[Samanfur]

It takes a large amount of effort to accessiblise a website, I very much doubt it would be enforced since 95%+ of websites would be sued.

Hence my sense of morbid curiosity'd like to see what'd happen if they were challenged, since newspapers're likely to get more hits than universities, local councils and the like - which do tend to follow the DDA as a matter of course.

[bairy]

I would say that it wouldn't and shouldn't hold up in court. That's from a technical point of view. Of course disabled people have the right to view websites too, but since it's so tricky to implement, I don't think it should be enforced until the web standards (that's an actual set of standards, rather than just a phrase) improve further.

If a newspaper gets done then you suddenly have this whole wide open what should be/what shouldn't be accessibilised debate.

The problem with implementing accessability is with dynamically generated pages, i.e. most of the web, it can be a real git to put it and make work with every possibly page you might have, so making it compulsory would be a huge headache for web developers, and we get enough headaches with making pages work in all the browsers - no more needed ta!


Just to clarify what I mean by accessibility.. being able to make the text larger without breaking the design, making the page a logical flow so audio readers can read it properly, having different colour schemes (white on black, black on white) for people with bad sight.

[Samanfur]

Like I said: purely morbid curiosity, since these things can be a little unpredictable.