W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 1998

Re: Seamless Accessibility

From: David Poehlman <poehlman@clark.net>
Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 14:01:31 -0400 (EDT)
To: "Kasday, Leonard R (Len), ALTEC" <kasday@att.com>
cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.980524134751.26324J-100000@shell.clark.net>
This is a good point.  People should get what they want but so many don't
know what that is.  It takes a lot of experience browsing the changing web
with a bunch of browsers to truly know what you want.  We do have a
spectrum which I won't go into here at length though.  What we need to
decide is how that iformation is made available not to whom.  Everyone
should have what they want where possible.  You never know what your
circumstance may become that may change your needs.  

I'm not going to make this much longer, but I am going to take the
unprecidented step for me of putting what I want on this list.  Up till
now, I've been working objectively to assist from a user's perspective
toward a broadly accessible web.

I want all the information I can get about a page, but I want to decide
how I get it.  For instance, I want seemless accessability for lots of the
content out there.  I want to be able to interact with it using my
screenreader and any browser within reason of my choosing.  This goes for
all platforms.  Some of the barriers to this are now and for a long time
will be outside the scope of our effort here.  I also want to be able to
get the information straying from seemless accessability if necessary to
get it.  I'd like to know the ball is blue.  I'd also like to know why.
Does it mean new, updated, discontinued, for sale... I'd also like to know
what the picture looks like not just what it represents.  I don't though
want this to interfere with just simply browsing the content.  It can be
sort of like an audio description of the web so to speak.  Sort of like
page info in netscape or almost looking at the source.  Yes, I want a lot.
I know though that I'm not going to get all of it.  From a broad
standpoint though, puting myself asside for a sec, I'm impressed with the
concept of seemless accessability as it pertains to web content because it
means if propper care is taken to deliver the content based on the proper
criteria those who have nor will have my degree of sophistocation where
browsing the web is concerned will be less likely to have to turn to me
and others and ask, how do I get to the edit box, how do I find the right
radio button, why can't I access those frames???  We're not talking about
hiding anything here, just providing a good choice that will fit many
circumstances in this imperfect world.  The choice it seems to me is not
between seemless accessability and what we want, but a ong list of choices
that are available for users from the first timer to the burnout like me
to look at a page, view content or work with in a method most desireable
for them.
I hope I've not been too unclear here.

On Sat, 23 May 1998, Kasday, Leonard R (Len), ALTEC wrote:

> While I agree that people should have the ability to hear or not hear long
> descriptions or d links, I'm really bothered by the implication that comes
> across in some of the mail that people who want to know what a page looks
> like are somehow wrong or misguided.  For example, a statement that
> describes descriptions of visual aspects as a "frill" that "some people
> value".  Saying that someone values a "frill" come across to me as a
> put-down of that person.
> As far as I'm concerned you try to give a person what they want, period,
> without any value judgments.
> Len
> Leonard R. Kasday
> kasday@att.com (until June 30)

touching the internet
voice: 1-(301) 949-7599
Received on Sunday, 24 May 1998 14:01:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:01 UTC