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

RE: an action item :)

From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@erols.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 14:48:22 -0400
Message-ID: <01C10D3D.511855C0.apembert@erols.com>
To: 'Emmanuelle Gutierrez y Restrepo' <emmanuelle@teleline.es>, Lisa Seeman <lseeman@globalformats.com>, "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Emmanuelle,

	Handicapping environmental conditions are controllable at the user level 
more efficiently than at the page author level. If a kiosk is located in an 
noisy location, it should be provided with a personal hearing device 
(movable speaker, earphones, etc.)  There is nothing the page author can do 
to improve the situation other than comply with the usual guidelines.  If 
the page or kiosk interface is provided in visible print, it should also 
provide it in audio and in graphics. What else would you have a page author 
do?

	As to driving --- if your hands are tied up, your mind should be on what 
you're doing. By the way, there is an inexpensive device advertised on tv, 
to "convert" your cell phone to a hands-free use. Advertises that it works 
as well as more expensive systems, so there must be a variety of products 
available already to compensate for this environmental handicapping 
condition.

	But the most effective answer to temporarily disabling environmental 
conditions is either to modify the hardware to accommodate if it is a 
regularly-occuring condition, or wait and use the Internet/affected sites, 
at a more appropriate time and place.

				Anne

				Anne

Anne Pemberton
apembert@erols.com
http://www.erols.com/stevepem
http://www.geocities.com/apembert45

On Monday, July 16, 2001 12:24 PM, Emmanuelle Gutierrez y Restrepo 
[SMTP:emmanuelle@teleline.es] wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have not surely known how to choose the examples. But I don't 
understand
> the interest to eliminate the external factors since, if the guidelines 
keep
> in mind to people with disability, automatically, they cover the 
necessities
> of people that are in a handicaped situation.
> I agree with Anne in that it is dangerous to drive and to assist to 
another
> task at the same time. In Spain it is forbidden to use the mobile 
telephone
> while he/she is driving. But I have understood that there are some 
countries
> in those that there are highways in those that it is not necessary that 
the
> driver maintains all his attention and, also, I know that systems of
> automatic conduction are designing. Anyway it can be a possible situation 
in
> the future, that some will consider important to keep in mind and other 
not.
> But if all agree on eliminating the external factors, me too.
>
> Regards,
> Emmanuelle
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Anne Pemberton" <apembert@erols.com>
> To: "'Emmanuelle Gutierrez y Restrepo'" <emmanuelle@teleline.es>; "Lisa
> Seeman" <lseeman@globalformats.com>; <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 3:53 PM
> Subject: RE: an action item :)
>
>
> > Emmanuelle,
> >
> > The examples you used are unique uses of the Internet and would not 
apply
> > to all web pages on the Internet - only those to be used in those 
unique
> > situations. I am strongly opposed to ANY accommodation that encourages 
the
> > user to be distracted while driving a vehicle on the same road with me! 
If
> > you HAVE to consult the Internet while you are driving, at least have 
the
> > sense to pull off the road and do your thing, then get back on the 
road.
> >
> > Anne
> >
> > On Monday, July 16, 2001 7:32 AM, Emmanuelle Gutierrez y Restrepo
> > [SMTP:emmanuelle@teleline.es] wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > The External Factors that I have mentioned, are not limited to a 
noisy
> or
> > > not well illuminated atmosphere neither they refer to situations in
> those
> > > that the user can make something to change them.
> > > Let us think of a person that uses a kiosk in an airport or in that 
that
> > > drives their car and at the same time he/she has to use Internet or 
in
> > any
> > > situation in the one that the hands or the user's senses are 
hindered.
> > >
> > > If the main objective of the guidelines is people with disability, 
then
> > they
> > > should keep in mind the handicap situation in that any person can be.
> > Unless
> > > you want to follow a "disability" definition different from the
> > conventional
> > > one internationally for the WHO.
> > >
> > > I don't believe that to include external factors reduces the 
importance
> > of
> > > the guidelines, on the contrary, I believe that for some managers, 
not
> > very
> > > sensitive to the necessities of people with disabilities, this focus 
ago
> > > more attractive the necessity to implement them.
> > >
> > > Of course that it is a work of EO to explain the reasons to apply the
> > > guidelines, but I believe that in the introduction it should be
> > mentioned,
> > > at least, the factors that the guidelines are kept in mind or that 
they
> > > cover.
> > >
> > > Kind regards,
> > > Emmanuelle
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Lisa Seeman" <lseeman@globalformats.com>
> > > To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> > > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 9:57 AM
> > > Subject: Re: an action item :)
> > >
> > >
> > > > I think Emmanuelle has made a point of other advantages of 
following
> > the
> > > > guidelines. That in following them the site will be useable and
> helpful
> > > for
> > > > "the noisy or
> > > > not well illuminated atmospheres".
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This, I think, is just usability and not about making content
> > > inaccessible.
> > > > Now our guidelines will help these situations, but they are not (in 
my
> > > > opinion) what they were for. Therefore I prefer to not include 
these
> > > > usability but not accessibility points. I think that is belongs 
with
> > EO,
> > > as
> > > > another good reason for implementing the guidelines.
> > > >
> > > > I think making people think that these guideline include things to
> help
> > > > people in a noisy room, will reduce their importance and legitimize 
a
> > > "take
> > > > it or leave it"  attitude.
> > > >
> > > > I was under the impression, that we put some responsibility on the 
end
> > > user.
> > > > Turning on the lighting is probably a good minimum requirement.
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Emmanuelle Gutierrez y Restrepo" <emmanuelle@teleline.es>
> > > > To: <cyns@opendesign.com>; <lseeman@globalformats.com>;
> > > <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> > > > Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 6:35 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: an action item :)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > Maybe be good idea that in the introduction of the guidelines the
> > > > meticulous
> > > > > explanations are eliminated on the types of deficiencies that 
cover,
> > > > > provided another document that explains clearly what a type of 
users
> > > exist
> > > > > and in what circumstances they have been kept in mind when 
editing
> > the
> > > > > rules.
> > > > >
> > > > > Anyway, in the writing proposed by Lisa she lacks to mention the
> > > external
> > > > > conditions. I believe that we can classify to all the users and
> their
> > > > > personal circumstances in three factors to keep in mind: Personal
> > > factors
> > > > > (that cover the disability, the age and the illiteracy),
> > Technological
> > > > > Factors (that cover the necessity to use assistive technology and
> all
> > > the
> > > > > technologies that can be used) and External Factors (that cover 
the
> > > noisy
> > > > or
> > > > > not well illuminated atmospheres and any other obstacle unaware 
to
> > the
> > > > > person).
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Emmanuelle
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: <cyns@opendesign.com>
> > > > > To: <lseeman@globalformats.com>; <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> > > > > Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 2:18 AM
> > > > > Subject: RE: an action item :)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Short, sweet, and to the point.  I like it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Lisa Seeman [mailto:lseeman@globalformats.com]
> > > > > > Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 7:11 AM
> > > > > > To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> > > > > > Subject: an action item :)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In the ftf one of my action items was to write a replacement 
for
> > the
> > > > list
> > > > > > of impairments catered for in the introduction.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The idea is to give people a sense of context about who and 
what
> > the
> > > > > > guidelines are for, some awareness of what user groups and 
devices
> > > > exist,
> > > > > > without opening a Pandora's box of classifying disabilities 
(which
> > I
> > > > > > personally felt could get offensive)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I felt that it important to get a proposal on the table, so 
that
> we
> > > can
> > > > > > agree if this is the kind of thing we want in principal, and 
then
> > we
> > > > > > can  get pedantic about semantics and my grammar.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So in your comments, please remember to say if this is
> > > > > >   the kind of thing that you want content wise
> > > > > >   and the kind of style that we want
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It is a bit plagiarized from our home site, but we do not 
 mind.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > <this is it>
> > > > > > Understanding the guidelines involves remembering that not all
> > devices
> > > > are
> > > > > > the same, (e.g. keypads, brail readers )  not all systems are 
the
> > > same,
> > > > > > (e.g. voice browsers, screen magnifiers)  and not all  people 
are
> > the
> > > > > same.
> > > > > > (From the visually impaired, low motor coordination, to the
> > learning
> > > > > > disabled, what make you unique?) In implementing the guidelines
> one
> > > must
> > > > > > attempt to cater for the maximum number of people in the 
maximum
> > > number
> > > > of
> > > > > > scenarios. This can be achieved though a single accessible
> > rendering
> > > or
> > > > > > multiple accessible renderings that are optimized for different
> > > > > situations.
> > > > > > </this is it>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
Received on Monday, 16 July 2001 14:54:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:11 GMT