I read the article with interest, there is no change in the arguments being presented at all when compared to articles being written 6 or 7 years ago. Nothing is new and the Internet is still by and large inaccessible. It could be argued that the problems experienced by visually impaired are still the same. Hence the same reasons presented for accessibility. But if the reasons being presented are not commercially viable then they will never be implemented.

Threats of court action seem to fall on deaf ears and even large organisations who can afford their own design team have turned a blind eye....OK.. pun intended.

A retro-step was made by the accessibility lobby themselves when Bobby (the easiest test for accessibility) became a bit of software you had to pay for. Surely this product development could have been funded by other means?

Anarchy rules the Internet, always has done, the one way to obtain an accessible Internet is not to legislate it by Governments or to offer an alternative search option. But to make it a requirement to being listed anywhere.........

Now that would set the cat among the pigeons.

__________________
Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes.