W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 1999

Re: QED & Marshall McLuhan

From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@crosslink.net>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 1999 18:26:11 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
At 11:28 AM 6/9/1999 -0700, Kelly Ford wrote:
>		Anne,
>Exactly what part of the web would you apply this sort of rewrite for the
>population you are talking about?  What guidelines and such would you
>propose to help those creating the web pages to know how to make the pages
>accessible to the population you are talking about?  

Any part of the web that contains information that would be of interest to
people with cognitive differences. And that is as broad a category as the
part of the web which needs accessibility for those with visual
differences. Making home pages for government agencies, newspapers, and
stores which contain maximum accessibility to non-readers would be an
important beginning. Sites which provide services useful to ordinary folks,
including bus, train or plane tickets, or basic instructions to use
services (government, etc.) or sites, should provide maximum accessibility
to those with cognitive differences. 

Suppose I am the head
>of the web department for the LA Times, how would you suggest I make my web
>site accessible to comply with your standards?  I'm asking these questions
>not to dismiss your concerns but to learn how you imagine them working in

If head of the web department for the LA Times, I'd tell the editors of the
various departments that I wanted "meaningful graphics" with each and every
story, including charts, graphs and tables as well as photos, sound clips,
and video clips. Whoever supplies the editor/s with stories for inclusion
in each day's issue would be told that the story must be in multi-media as
well as text, and writers would be teamed with the appropriate technicians
(photographers, sound men, photographers, number crunchers, etc.) CNN would
find it easier to meet the guidelines because they already have staff doing
video clips and sound bites ... USA Today is also improving their use of
graphics - even in its short "Nationline" stories, graphics of the
person/s, places, things accompany many stories. Not yet every story. I've
never been to the LA Times site, so I don't know how graphically inclined
their pages are - some newspaper sites do more than others with graphics,
just as print papers vary in their presentations. Print papers are often
driven by advertisers to keep the paper to as low a readability as
possible. When the Blackstone weekly ran stories of what I was doing with
special ed kids on the Internet back in the late eighties, the editor
zapped out whole paragraphs I'd suggested explaining what we were doing
because the general population of the community would have no clue. That
paper is working on its web site now! 

Newspapers will likely rise to the occasion ... but the government


Anne L. Pemberton
Enabling Support Foundation
Received on Wednesday, 9 June 1999 21:20:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:04 UTC