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

RE: Kynn's Definition of Accessibility, and Uncaptioned Webcast s

From: Neff, Robert <Robert.Neff@usmint.treas.gov>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 07:17:39 -0500
Message-ID: <B1E68D292F3CD111A57C0000F67CB3CA01044300@WDCSRV03.usmint.treas.gov>
To: "'jeffrey pledger'" <jpledger@mindspring.com>, Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
The mere point that people are thinking about trying to make something
accessible (even though they may be unable at the time) is a great step!

		-----Original Message-----
		From:	jeffrey pledger [mailto:jpledger@mindspring.com]
		Sent:	Wednesday, November 10, 1999 5:44 AM
		To:	Kynn Bartlett; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
		Subject:	Re: Kynn's Definition of Accessibility, and
Uncaptioned   Webcasts

		Kynn, 

			I don't agree with your logic here.  Nor do I agree
with the complaint you
		received on the web cast.  I thought the goal of making the
web accessible
		is to do it for all people, no matter what their disability.
This should
		be done looking at two primary resouces, is it technically
feasible and is
		it readily achievable, if I can use these phrases here.  

			As more and more things are moving to the web, it is
up to all of us to
		plan better to ensure that accessibility is being
maintained.  Again, I
		will post to the list, if you want to view and hear examples
of accessible
		video content done via the web, e.g. audio describe and
closed captioned,
		please go to the Able Channel at www.tvontheweb.com and see
for yourself.  

		Jeff Pledger 
		President, Able Channel At 06:21 PM 11/8/99 -0800, Kynn
Bartlett wrote:
		>At about 1 hour 50 minutes into the webcast of the InterLab
accessibility
		>panel, a member of the audience asked an interesting
question, "I can
		>interpret some of what you have said to mean that we should
stop this
		>video transmission right now -- we have no signer, we have
no text.
		>How do you make those judgments?"
		>
		>It brought up an intriguing quandry -- should we refuse to
do something,
		>if it cannot be done accessibly?  (In this case, there were
no funds
		>available to hire real-time transcription or even
after-the-fact
		>transcriptions.)  Should SLAC have decided not to webcast
in that
		>case?
		>
		>Some people would argue "if you can't do it accessibly, you
shouldn't
		>do it."
		>
		>I'm not sure I agree with that.  Mainly because of how I
define
		>accessibility.  The way I see it is that any given web
service is
		>going to have a potential audience of a given size -- and
the
		>percentage of potential users who can use that service will
range
		>from 0% to 100%.  The GOAL of accessible web design is to
MAXIMIZE
		>THE PERCENTAGE OF POTENTIAL AUDIENCE MEMBERS WHO ARE ABLE
TO USE
		>THE SERVICE.  (Caps to make it stand out, not because I'm
shouting.)
		>
		>By that reasoning, ANY CHANGE WHICH INCREASES THE
PERCENTAGE IS A
		>STEP TOWARDS ACCESSIBILITY, and conversely, ANY CHANCE WITH
DECREASES
		>THE PERCENTAGE IS A STEP AWAY.
		>
		>Applying this to the case in question, let's say that only
50% of
		>the potential audience could use the Real Video file.  The
other
		>half don't have a compatible viewer, or they can't hear, or
they
		>can't see, or they don't have a computer (cell phone, PDA,
etc),
		>or any other reason.
		>
		>If we turn off the web cast, the number of people who can
access
		>that service goes from 50% to 0%.  This is not a step
towards
		>accessibility, my friends -- in fact, it's the opposite.
TURNING OFF
		>THE WEBCAST WOULD DECREASE ACCESSIBILITY.
		>
		>We need to be careful, when we make mandates about
accessibility,
		>that we are not saying "do it this way OR ELSE" -- because
then we
		>lead to an overall net effect in which accessibility is
decreased.
		>Our goal should always, *always* be to promote changes
which
		>increase accessibility, which means INCREASING the number
of potential
		>audience members who can use a service, and never to
DECREASE that
		>number.
		>
		>Agree or disagree?
		>
		>
		>-- 
		>Kynn Bartlett  <kynn@idyllmtn.com>
http://www.kynn.com/
		>Chief Technologist, Idyll Mountain Internet
http://www.idyllmtn.com/
		>Next Speaking Stop: New Orleans, 9 Dec 99
http://www.builder.com/live/
		>CC/PP Builds the Future of the Web --> learn more at
http://www.ccpp.org/
		>
		>
Received on Wednesday, 10 November 1999 07:17:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:45 GMT