- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 09:08:40 -0800
- To: "Lee Roberts" <leeroberts@roserockdesign.com>, "WCAG List" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 7:19 AM -0600 2/11/02, Lee Roberts wrote: >One other thing was unique enough to point out. The article at >http://www.otal.umd.edu/uupractice/cognition/ shows a page set up for the >cognitively challenged. It explains what groups fall into this category. I >can imagine a web site would be fraught with difficulty if all the pages >were set up in the manner the top of the page was set up. Yes -- this is part of the reason that alternate versions make a lot of sense when you're talking about the variety of cognitive disabilities. What works for one person may be hell for another, and the only way around that is to have parallel presentations available. This is why we need to dispel the notion that alternate versions are "text-only pages for blind users" -- in truth, the blind users are well-served by a generally accessible page with straight-forward layout. The real benefits of parallel versions can be seen when we talk about _other_ (non-blind) groups of disabled users. --Kynn -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com> http://kynn.com Chief Technologist, Idyll Mountain http://idyllmtn.com Web Accessibility Expert-for-hire http://kynn.com/resume Next Book: Teach Yourself CSS in 24 http://cssin24hours.com
Received on Monday, 11 February 2002 12:09:37 UTC