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

Re: A new iconography? (was:How to convince businesses to be accessib le...)

From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@crosslink.net>
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 14:07:22 -0700
Message-Id: <>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org

	I disagree. I feel that in the case of persons whose disability includes
cognitive limitations, accessibility means they should have the full
content conveyed ... full content meaning both text and
graphics/multi-media ... A text without supportive graphics should be
considered an incomplete page, not yet accessible to all the PWD's whose
"buying power" is promised. 

	I do not think it's reasonable to draw an arbitrary line dividing disabled
web users into those who will be accommodated under accessibility
guidelines, and those who will be ignored or ghettoized. 

	I thought it interesting that the language you chose to illustrate
"foreign languages" is normally used as  graphics rather than as


At 09:44 AM 10/7/00 -0400, David Poehlman wrote:

>comprehention and accessability are two separate issues as I was trying
>to point out in my example with a foreign language.

Anne L. Pemberton
Enabling Support Foundation
Received on Saturday, 7 October 2000 13:20:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:10 UTC