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

Re: Philosophy of WCAG (thanks Matt)

From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@erols.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 16:35:43 -0400
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20010730162939.009fe180@pop.erols.com>
To: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>, "Matt May" <mcmay@bestkungfu.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Kynn,

         It is not just companies and web authors who need to expand their 
understanding of the human element in failing to address accessibility. 
While you expect a clamor if a site put a sign out saying "this site is not 
intended for use by the blind." what do you expect if you say "This site 
has no illustrations since we don't know how to do them well, and we just 
don't care about people who need and want them anyway".

         I think you have the solution to the ruler problem here below .... 
Yes, identify the reading level will result in the end result we want, to 
make people aware of what they are putting out there.

         If I could use metadata to find pages on given topics with the 
appropriate reading level, a lot of the work I'm doing this summer to 
associate Internet links with specific Virginia SOLs would be so much easier.

         If firewalls could also distinguish reading levels, it may help 
reduce kids' tendencies to flit in and out of sites because they will 
encounter fewer sites that they can's use.



                                         Anne

t 11:33 AM 7/30/01 -0400, Kynn Bartlett wrote:
If we adopt this principle, then things such as "grade level" become
>useful as part of a -disclosure statement- for a site, rather than as
>a normative checkpoint saying "you must reach <some value calculated
>by formula>."
>
>In other words, not this:
>
>     "X.X  Write to at least 8th grade reading level."
>
>But rather, this:
>
>     "X.X  Clearly identify the reading level of the content."
>
>Because, see, the point of all this is -- as Al recently alluded -- to
>get web developers to CHANGE THE WAY THEY THINK ABOUT WEB DEVELOPMENT.
>
>Once you do that, the checklists become a set of reminders and not an
>onerous list of "rules."  The way to make that change is to require
>people to think about things.  In order to meet the second checkpoint
>above, you have to think about your reading level.  In other words,
>such a checkpoint requires you to do the necessary analysis and thought
>so that -you-, the developer, can reach the right conclusion.
>
>--Kynn
Received on Monday, 30 July 2001 16:55:52 GMT

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