W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2001

Re: Some more thoughts re 3.3 etc.

From: Lisa Seeman <seeman@netvision.net.il>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 10:30:37 +0200
Message-ID: <003801c0cc98$d786b9c0$8197003e@seeman>
To: "Jeff Isom" <jeff@cpd2.usu.edu>, "WCAG" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Sometimes we design to the tool and sometimes to the person. Use of clear language is for the person. A consistent method of navigation is for the person.

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Jeff Isom <jeff@cpd2.usu.edu>
    To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
    Date: Friday, March 30, 2001 4:53 PM
    Subject: Re: Some more thoughts re 3.3 etc.
    I'm new to the group so forgive me if some of my thoughts have already been expressed.
    I agree that it makes sense to design pages for tools rather than specific disabilities. But this leads to the question of what are the tools.  It is obvious that people with visual disabilities use screen readers or screen magnifiers.  People with motor impairments use assistive keyboards or other input devices.  It is easier to create guidelines and checkpoints for those tools.  But what are the tools used by people with cognitive impairments.  In my mind, they have tools too, only their tools aren't hardware or software solutions.  Instead their tools are the things that were debated during the call yesterday.  They use the tools of redundant navigation mechanisms (2.1) and clear and simple writing (3.3).  Without these tools, the pages are not accessible to them.  So I don't see how those items can be removed from the Guidelines.
    Just my thoughts on the matter.
    Jeffrey Isom
    Instructional Designer
    Web Accessibility in Mind (http://www.webaim.org)
    Center for Persons with Disabilities
    Utah State University
    Logan, Utah   84322-6800
    (435) 797-7582
Received on Tuesday, 24 April 2001 03:30:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:36 UTC