> Still, reality is that there is more and more legislation around the > world > that requires at least certain parties to ensure their sites be > accesible, > and thus does force people to learn to do things more right. So even if > a > semantic editor would require its users to learn some things, it would > still > in fact make their life easier than if they need to comply with such > legislation using an unfit wannabe-WYSIWYG tool.
Very true. We've seen a lot of interest in our editor due to the fact that we have an accessibility checker built-in. Sadly there is still a lot of work to be done to help users create accessible pages, but it is a key requirement for a lot of people. Sadly, the other key requirement is that it's very simple and intuitive for users because they don't actually want to spend money on accessibility, they just want to achieve government mandated compliance. Speaking of which, if there was an area that needs significant work to make it more usable for tools. At the moment most of the recommendations are way too vague to be able to check them specifically - often humans would have trouble determining if something was compliant or not, let alone an automated checker. > Sander Tekelenburg Regards, Adrian Sutton.
