On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 02:48:07PM -0800, Tim May wrote: | | At 2:08 PM -0500 2/28/01, Adam Shostack wrote: | >So, this web page doesn't work without javascript. I find that | >somewhat ironic, because you'd think that the ABA would be aware of | >the Americans With Disabilities act, which requires a reasonable | >accomodation; in this case that accomodation would be one less line of | >html (the meta-equiv refresh line) | | The ADA does not require writers, whether lawyers or novelists or | whatever, to write their material in ways that the blind can read, | that retarded persons can understand, or that the Java-less can | process. | | (Though I admit that many of these rent-seeking vipers would of | course _like_ the ADA to be extended to cover such things, if only to | increase the rent they can collect in thousands of lawsuits.) Actually, if they can do so with reasonable accommodation, I think it does. (Note that its not writers, but publishers, who I think may have the "reasonable accommodation" requirement.) Of course, the ADA http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/42/chapters/126/toc.html is not clear about this--it clearly covers transportation, hotels, and the like, and services operated by private entities is not at all clearly defined. I'm not saying that thats a good thing, but given that the ABA is a nest of those rent-seekers, having them on the receiving side carries a certain poetry that I'm suprised you don't see. Adam -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume