W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-rd@w3.org > March 2012

Re: [urgent] input from WAI Coordination Group on mobile accessibility pre-cal

From: <sharper@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2012 10:06:40 -0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <8e2b16a6c4dd38fb5e491d8adf3ee316.squirrel@webmail.cs.man.ac.uk>
To: "giorgio brajnik" <brajnik@uniud.it>
Cc: "Vivienne CONWAY" <v.conway@ecu.edu.au>, "sharper@cs.man.ac.uk" <sharper@cs.man.ac.uk>, "Shadi Abou-Zahra" <shadi@w3.org>, "Yeliz Yesilada" <yyeliz@metu.edu.tr>, "Peter Thiessen" <thiessenp@gmail.com>, "Simon Harper" <simon.harper@manchester.ac.uk>, "RDWG" <public-wai-rd@w3.org>
OK so one of my contentions is that accessibility and disability involve
people who may share an intersection but are not the same set - and that
we are interested in accessibility (not exclusively disability). In this
case, low income, literacy, developing regions, situational impairments
would all be included.

For instance if we have an abstract which is about mobile phone users
without a disability but who are situationally impaired by the device -
maybe with some interesting insights into constrained usage - would we
reject it as not being on topic?

What about abstracts which discuss the problems of web usage in developing
regions?

I think accessibility is much bigger than disability alone and is not
confined to the WHO definition of disability? Further, the WHO definition
is written with quite open definitions but all in the implicit context of
impairment - for instance there are plenty of 'activity limitations' which
can occur which would not be considered to be a disability.

We can discuss all this in more detail on the telecon - I'm just concerned
we are loosing yet more pre-call time.

Cheers

> I really don't know where to stand, but I'm throwing my bits anyway and
> now, as Josh nicely put it, will see the brickbats fly :-) .
>
> I think one part of the solution is in better clarifying what really
> does "people with disability" mean? do that include elderly? or people
> that are temporarily impaired?
>
> If we take the WHO def
>
> <quote>
> Disabilities is an umbrella term, covering impairments, activity
> limitations, and participation restrictions. An impairment is a problem
> in body function or structure; an activity limitation is a difficulty
> encountered by an individual in executing a task or action; while a
> participation restriction is a problem experienced by an individual in
> involvement in life situations.
>
> Thus disability is a complex phenomenon, reflecting an interaction
> between features of a person’s body and features of the society in which
> he or she lives.
>
>   [http://www.who.int/topics/disabilities/en/]
> </quote>
>
> then I think that Simon's initial comment on the narrowness of the
> meaning of  "pwd" is not fully justified.
>
> However I'm not sure that this is the intended meaning by the vast
> majority of the people that would read the cfp.
>
>
>
>    Giorgio
>
>
Received on Saturday, 10 March 2012 12:10:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 10 March 2012 12:10:59 GMT