W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > October to December 1999

re: skill level

From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-hwg@idyllmtn.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 09:42:44 -0800
Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.19991130094016.00bdd7c0@mail.idyllmtn.com>
To: love26@gorge.net
Cc: au <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
At 08:17 AM 11/30/1999 , William Loughborough wrote:
>So long as "skill level" is not confused with "ability level" I have no
>problem with what I've been seeing.  It is vital to use our
>recommendations in an attempt to make *any* software that is used as a
>tool to publish materials on the Web, _including such things as word
>processors with a "save to Web" feature_, be made to: produce output
>that conforms to WCAG; be tools that are accessible to (usable by) PWDs.
>The latter point is of *MAJOR* importance inasmuch as the WWW is the
>vehicle for attaining inclusion.

Dumb question, if I'm someone who works extensively in the field of
software for users who are visually impaired, and I make a special
purpose authoring tool for someone who can't see -- which relies 
on extensive aural cues (and doesn't work that well with a braille
terminal) -- have I met your goal or not met your goal?  It can be
used by (some) PWDs, but not all PWDs; is it therefore an invalid
tool according to our ATAG?

I forget, did we answer this?  If so, feel free to refer me back to
the archives or summarize an answer, we have enough stuff to worry
about at present if this has been covered.

-- 
Kynn Bartlett                                    mailto:kynn@hwg.org
President, HTML Writers Guild                    http://www.hwg.org/
AWARE Center Director                          http://aware.hwg.org/
Received on Tuesday, 30 November 1999 13:48:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:39:43 UTC