W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2002

Re: Definition of Accessible

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 07:56:07 -0400 (EDT)
To: Gregg Vanderheiden <GV@TRACE.WISC.EDU>
cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0206130754420.19182-100000@tux.w3.org>

I think this makes good sense. It is the approach that was follwoed in the
version 1 round of guidelines (all of them, not just WCAG) I believe at Ian's
instigation, and it seems to still hold.

Cheers

Chaals

On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:

  I think we need to watch our use of terminology here.

  Especially the term "accessible".

  If we say that things are accessible - we need to say that everything is
  accessible or nothing is ever accessible.  There is no middle ground if
  we are going to make blanket statements.

  Proposal:

  1)  We NEVER declare something as accessible or not.
  2)  We ONLY talk about
      a) things being accessible to individuals or to people with
  particular characteristics.
  Or
      b) things meeting particular accessibility standards.

  If we talk about (a) things being accessible to groups of individuals
  then we should carefully and fully list the characteristics including
  presence or lack of any other disabilities  - including cognitive level)
Received on Thursday, 13 June 2002 07:56:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:19 GMT