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

Re: Functional equivalents vs. descriptions

From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 08:44:35 -0700
Message-Id: <a05100309b7a6e076ff9b@[10.0.1.17]>
To: "Charles F. Munat" <chas@munat.com>, "WAI Guidelines WG" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 3:13 AM -0700 2001/8/20, Charles F. Munat wrote:
>The problem, as I see it, is that we've gotten a bit carried away. We want
>everyone to have access to the same *experiences*. This is simply not
>possible (nor is it desirable in my mind).

Agreed.  I am going to work on a short essay about why I think the word
"equivalent" doesn't mean the same thing as "alternative", and why the
e-word is a barrier to understanding accessibility, especially when you
are talking about dynamically generated user experiences.

--Kynn

-- 
Kynn Bartlett <kynn@reef.com>
Technical Developer Liaison
Reef North America
Accessibility - W3C - Integrator Network
Tel +1 949-567-7006
________________________________________
BUSINESS IS DYNAMIC. TAKE CONTROL.
________________________________________
http://www.reef.com
Received on Monday, 20 August 2001 11:58:36 GMT

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