> I'd wager most views that espouse "accessibility should be guidelines, not regulations" would 180 as soon as the person holding that view was affected by even

> I'd wager most views that espouse "accessibility should be guidelines, not regulations" would 180 as soon as the person holding that view was affected by even the smallest vision disability and lack of WCAG compliance on a site they frequent. It's not from a lack of empathy and I think that framing the argument that way is emotionally manipulative. There is a cost associated with making things accessible. If that weren't the case we wouldn't have guidelines like WCAG that teach people how to make things accessible. It's not entirely intuitive so it must be learned which is an added cost. For the government that's very obviously going to be necessary. In the US it's mandated by law that federal agencies' services must be accessible. That's the scope that I'm comfortable with. The government is for the people so that naturally extends to all of its citizens, not just the able-bodied. Private companies don't have any such obligation to serve every person and individuals definitely don't. Guidelines are the right balance. You don't infringe on people's freedom of expression and you get iterative improvements on specifications that make it easier for people building accessibility tech to be on the same page.