<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: All change on the PhotoLegal Express</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.photolegal.com/index.php/2009/06/19/all-change-on-the-photolegal-express/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.photolegal.com/index.php/2009/06/19/all-change-on-the-photolegal-express/</link>
	<description>A UK podcast about Photography and the Law</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 May 2010 19:39:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Sebastian Crump</title>
		<link>http://www.photolegal.com/index.php/2009/06/19/all-change-on-the-photolegal-express/comment-page-1/#comment-66</link>
		<dc:creator>Sebastian Crump</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2009 07:07:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.photolegal.com/?p=207#comment-66</guid>
		<description>Sad to hear about spam, but yes it seems to be a fact of online life these days.

I try and avoid using Captchas because of the accessibility problems it introduces (accessibility is one of my professional skills, whereas photography is a personal hobby for me). However, accessibility is an interesting point that could be covered in PhotoLegal. Does a photography website need to be accessible to blind users who, after all, will never be able to use it on an equal basis as sighted users. I don&#039;t think the Disability Discrimination Act provides for this sort of exception, but would be interested in view of the PhotoLegal team.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sad to hear about spam, but yes it seems to be a fact of online life these days.</p>
<p>I try and avoid using Captchas because of the accessibility problems it introduces (accessibility is one of my professional skills, whereas photography is a personal hobby for me). However, accessibility is an interesting point that could be covered in PhotoLegal. Does a photography website need to be accessible to blind users who, after all, will never be able to use it on an equal basis as sighted users. I don&#8217;t think the Disability Discrimination Act provides for this sort of exception, but would be interested in view of the PhotoLegal team.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

