W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org > December 2000

Re: Accessibility vs. consideration X: how to handle

From: Leonard R. Kasday <kasday@acm.org>
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 15:58:26 -0500
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20001230154938.00cfece0@pop3.concentric.net>
To: w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org, nick@webthing.com
Nick and all...

Sorry, I sent this to the wrong list.  Please pursue on the guideline list, 
w3c-wai-gl@w3.org where I'm posting a (slightly edited) version...

I just want to make a brief reply to what Nick said though. I definitely do 
want to take consideration X seriously.  That's what I was trying to 
say.  The question has to do with the process we're following in the 
guideline group.  Some people have objected to accessibility guidelines 
because some authors will object some of the time. I'm trying to say that 
we don't throw out the guideline just because there are objections in some 
circumstances.  The question is what process we follow in the guidelines 
group to address considerations X.  Right now it's kind of ad hoc.  Anyway, 
I'm continuing this in the guidelines list.

Len

nick wrote:
>As to your question: it seems to me that accessibility cannot be
>well-served by antagonising authors.  This argues for always taking
>Consideration X seriously, and and accommodating it wherever reasonable
>(I think some of the more extreme examples you suggested fall down on
>the reasonableness test).

--
Leonard R. Kasday, Ph.D.
Institute on Disabilities/UAP and Dept. of Electrical Engineering at Temple 
University
(215) 204-2247 (voice)                 (800) 750-7428 (TTY)
http://astro.temple.edu/~kasday         mailto:kasday@acm.org

Chair, W3C Web Accessibility Initiative Evaluation and Repair Tools Group
http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/

The WAVE web page accessibility evaluation assistant: 
http://www.temple.edu/inst_disabilities/piat/wave/
Received on Saturday, 30 December 2000 15:59:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:10:38 GMT