W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2000

Re: woodcutter

From: Robert Neff <robneff@home.com>
Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 18:13:53 -0400
Message-ID: <000901bf9cf0$bbcb2500$59b10f18@alex1.va.home.com>
To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
i am confused. i do not understand this. does this mean if we include people
with cognitive disabilities then we lose people without cognitive disorders.
is this experimental?  How wide spread are these thoughts.  where have they
been successfully implemented?

what exactly is a standard for people with cognitive disabilities?  one of
the reasons we have text transcripts is so people people with cognitive
disabilities can read the text at their own pace.  seems there are many ends
to the spectrum for people with cognitive disabilities.

i do not see why we cant people with cognitive disabilities be a target
audience where there is a whole set of different rules for these graphics.
the purpose of universal design is to have one specification for all
browsers to render.  until the toolsets and translators come into being, i
do not think we need to be including this, but be aware of the diiferences -
so if people with cognitive disabilities of the type where they require
graphics like this, then that is a distinct target audience with its own
guidelines or technique.

no one has yet to explain to  me the accepted standards or how people teach
to people with cognitive disabilities (PCD) and what degree.  Do we need to
have a WCAG for PWD and a separate one for PCD? and what level of PCD are
covered in the WCAG?

i think these are honest questions and not a closed door.
Received on Sunday, 2 April 2000 19:15:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:04 GMT