I can't tell if we are arguing at cross purposes here, or whether we each take slightly different messages away from the Accessibility issue. In several posts now I've stressed the point that Accessibility is a question of universal access, and I mean to stand by that assertion. The most important concrete effect of universal access should be that the most limited user-agents can access most of the available content on most sites with relative ease, especially where that content is primarily text (i.e. minimal discrimination based on user-agent). Deprecated code won't always prevent such access but it can slow it down — I think we agree on that. As for search results: that Google PDA and Google Accessible Search are different makes sense given that the stated objective of the latter is to filter out sites that would be troublesome for people with vision impairments. What I was saying about other users, such as people with Blackberries, is that if the accessible search effectively returns only the most accessible pages from a regular result set, then on the whole the service would probably be beneficial to those users too (because hits would contain fewer graphics, have simpler page formats, utilise good keyboard navigation, separate style from content, etc.).