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

Re: A Fresh Look at Accommodating Cognitive Disabilities

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2000 15:12:06 -0400 (EDT)
To: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.20.0004281510500.13812-100000@tux.w3.org>
Certainly. I think the group has made relatively good rpogress on dealing
with the need for describing visual (and to some extent aural) information in
text formats. SO i always assume that this is understood. I guess I
shouldn't.

cheers

Charles

On Fri, 28 Apr 2000, William Loughborough wrote:

  CMcCN:: "Anyone been to a lecture where the presenter just spoke, with
  no  visual aids, and found it difficult to access the content"
  
  WL: Although Gregory can answer this a little better than I, the answer
  is that *unexplained* visual aids might be as confusing (difficult) and
  frustrating. Retinal input is unarguably effective but it requires
  enormous training that is often ignored in discussions of this kind.
  Just as unillustrated speech might be "difficult", so undefined (I think
  that implies, even requires something like "text") visual communication
  might be confusing/ineffective/diversive. Although it may be true that
  we are what we eat, it is not clear that the world *is* what we see. 
  
  -- 
  Love.
              ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE
  http://dicomp.pair.com
  

--
Charles McCathieNevile    mailto:charles@w3.org    phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative                      http://www.w3.org/WAI
Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053
Postal: GPO Box 2476V, Melbourne 3001,  Australia 
Received on Friday, 28 April 2000 15:12:09 GMT

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