W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2000

Re: PDF Alternatives?

From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 07:16:03 -0700
Message-ID: <39882D23.71A8EDE4@gorge.net>
To: Marti <marti@agassa.com>
CC: Dave J Woolley <DJW@bts.co.uk>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Marti:: "...the requirement is really that the 'agency' receive the data
in that form (for ease of processing?)."

WL: Why would "ease of processing" be enhanced by data that requires
human intervention (actually a human with retinae and adequate
processing ability) to be read? Also by whom is this adjudged a
*requirement*? What we are about in part is to ferret out capricious
*requirements* so that women may participate in society and blind guys
can read Webstuff readily.

Marti:: "providing the form information in an accessible format so that
a person can at least 'read' the questions ahead of time and be prepared
to work efficiently with assistance to fill out the 'actual' form makes
a lot of sense."

WL: To me it makes about as much sense as to have people carry wheel
chair users up a flight of stairs to avoid ramps/elevators, etc.

Marti:: "Compromise anyone?"

WL: Maybe "anyone" but not "everyone" and our slogan is "everyone,
everything connected" and nothing less has much merit.

-- 
Love.
            ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE
http://dicomp.pair.com
Received on Wednesday, 2 August 2000 10:17:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:49 GMT