W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg@w3.org > October 2008

Re: Updated Mobile-Accessibility documents

From: Alan Chuter <achuter@technosite.es>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 11:42:15 +0200
Message-ID: <49019877.6070703@technosite.es>
To: Tom Worthington <Tom.Worthington@tomw.net.au>
CC: "EOWG (E-mail)" <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>, MWI BPWG Public <public-bpwg@w3.org>

Thanks for your feedback on this Tom,

Perhaps we have given insufficient explanation in these documents, 
although at the beginning there is a link to the introductory document 
[1]. I think that Shawn assumed that reviewers would have read the 
introductory document first.

The Working Groups have clearly defined and carefully thought out scopes 
and objectives. To create a "common standard" to cover very different 
purposes would not be useful. Each recommendation describes the needs of 
two distinct but overlapping user groups. The purpose of the documents 
is to show the ways that by happy coincidence each can and does help the 
other. While there may have been a lack of coordination until now, the 
working groups have been surprised at how coherent their recommendations 
are, and these documents explain that.

The purpose is to guide implementers to avoid duplicating work who may 
otherwise assume that the recommendations are disjoint when they are not.


Alan Chuter
Departamento de Usabilidad y Accesibilidad
Technosite - Grupo Fundosa
Fundación ONCE
Tfno.: 91 121 03 30
Fax: 91 375 70 51

[1] http://www.w3.org/WAI/mobile/

Tom Worthington escribió:
> At 06:42 AM 24/10/2008, Shawn Henry wrote:
>> The final version of "Shared Web Experiences: Barriers Common to 
>> Mobile Device Users and People with Disabilities" has been published 
>> at: <http://www.w3.org/WAI/mobile/experiences> ...
> Perhaps the document should be re-titled: "Failure to Share Web 
> Experiences: Lack of Commonality by  W3C Committees a Barrier to Mobile 
> and Web Accessibility". ;-)
> This document was disappointing. From the title I expected a list of 
> barriers and then perhaps suggested ways to overcome them for both 
> mobile users and those with a disability. But what I got was an artifact 
> from a dispute between two groups of standards writers. This is of 
> little interest, or value, to those who want help designing web pages.
> If the mobile and accessible standards writers can't agree on common 
> standards, then it would be better to be honest about it and make that 
> clear, rather than obscuring the fact in complex technical language. Web 
> designers should be clearly told that the standards makers have failed 
> to agree and so the rest of us have to sort out it out as best we can.
> A document which lists the differences and similarities between the 
> mobile and accessibility standards is of use, but it should have a title 
> which reflects that is what it is. This should not be dressed up as 
> something more than it is.
> Tom Worthington FACS HLM tom.worthington@tomw.net.au Ph: 0419 496150
> Director, Tomw Communications Pty Ltd            ABN: 17 088 714 309
> PO Box 13, Belconnen ACT 2617                      http://www.tomw.net.au/
> Adjunct Senior Lecturer, Australian National University 
Received on Friday, 24 October 2008 09:44:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:42:59 UTC