RE: Multiple versions of a page

Hi,

I think Lee is right, and one major problem with having multiple
versions of a web page is that we can NEVER know the variety of
disabilities a person may have, and therefore splitting an accessible
web site into several sites can end up making that site essentially
inaccessible. What I mean, is that if someone needs checkpoints A and B
to access a site will not be able to do so if checkpoint A is solved by
Site Version 1, and checkpoint B by Site Version 3.

Cheers,
Gian

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lee.Otto [mailto:Lee.Otto@aspect.com.au]
> Sent: Thursday, 7 March 2002 2:56 PM
> To: w3c-wai-gl
> Subject: Multiple versions of a page
> 
> 
> Hi,
> For some months now I have been reading with great interest 
> the debate that
> has raged.  Quite frankly I haven't participated before 
> because someone else
> usually had the same viewpoint.
> 
> The issue of multiple versions of a page has however seemed 
> to be missing 1
> point.  If you have already covered this, then I apologise - 
> just ignore
> this email.   Focusing on abilities is better than focusing 
> on disabilities.
> It's important to remember that very often particularly if 
> the disability is
> intellectual or cognitive, that it is accompanied by other 
> disabilities.
> For example, my son has Down Syndrome, autism, a moderate 
> hearing loss and
> probably photo-sensitive epilepsy.  He also has no depth 
> perception and
> requires glasses to read.
> 
> All I'm really saying is - consider the possibility of more than one
> disability.  Easier said than done I know - since I don't know how to
> program for that either.
> 
> It's nice to finally talk to you all and thank you for the significant
> effort you are all putting in to helping people like my son.
> 
> Lee Otto
> 
> Lee Otto
> ASPECT 
> Ph: (02) 6245 8133
> Fax: (02) 6247 7620
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> **************************************************************
> **********
> MIMEsweeper has been used to check this email for security
> **************************************************************
> **********
> 
> 

Received on Thursday, 7 March 2002 19:20:20 UTC