W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2001

Re: Inclusion or accessibility

From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2001 12:45:32 -0400
Message-Id: <200110201635.MAA486890@smtp2.mail.iamworld.net>
To: Simon Evans <simon@senteacher.org>
Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Think about "could you use a JesterBot with your clients?"  Google for
"JesterBot"

The state of the art is not platform-independent.  I haven't asked UCI about
why they used Active-X controls instead of just more Java in JavaTherapy.com,
but you could look at the structure of that application as a source of hints
for things you might try.

There is at this time some sense that both AT and mainstream technology firms
want a better "standard, open" strategy for interfacing between them, and
processing modules that are distributed over the net are a class of AT that
should be enabled in this process.  I am not saying this process will
deliver a
solution for you, but it bears watching.  It's called "Project 8: E&IT and AT
interoperability" in

Accessibility Forum: Current Efforts
<http://www.accessibilityforum.org/projects/index.html>http://www.accessibi
lityforum.org/projects/index.html

Before there are any organized 'answers' out of that activity you may still
find 'allies' among the participants.

Also

Integrated Media Systems Center
<http://imsc.usc.edu/new.html>http://imsc.usc.edu/new.html

[try to parse _that_ page in speech without the status line, if you can...]

In your 'continuous play' mode, do you provide the equivalent of a
linear-tape-transport controls?  This is where the digital talking book wound
up.  It has a "just play it to me" mode but that has stop, restart from
where I
stopped, etc. more or less like a cassette audiotape.

You aren't disabling the context menu as accessed by Shift-F10, are you?  Is
there a way to leave some verbs that are risky for the LD client still
accessible, but unlikely for the LD user to stumble upon in their normal MO?

How much OO theory do you breate?

In the Device Independence Principles, they talk about a "delivery context." 
Your disabling of the right mouse button is a trait of a delivery context
which
has been constrained to be safe for a cognitively clumsy class of users, just
as we put fragile bric-a-brac on high shelves around rugrats and that works
until they develop the ability to climb bookshelves.  Have to leave some of
the
risk accessible so there is enough pleasure/pain spread to support
learning.  A
reasonable (progressive, managed) level of challenge, as in de-programming
with
VR for arachnophobia.

In 

The role of User Environments in The Grid
<http://trace.wisc.edu/docs/ud4grid/#_Toc495220373>http://trace.wisc.edu/do
cs/ud4grid/#_Toc495220373

I am trying to paint the "delivery context" story in terms of the virtual
world
that is everything the user experiences in their session realized with the
instrumentalities present in the delivery context.  Anyhow, we can
characterize
the delivery context by an ontology of elments and their proper interaction
methods, which ontology defines a logical 'terminal' device that is to be
adapted to by the device-independent resources.

The stuff you have built is less accessible for some users than WCAG 1.0
compliant stuff, but it is more accessible for other users of equal claim to
accomodation by reason of disability.

So this just shows that we need to look for a slightly deeper plane of
definition to capture the universals of the several experiences across
different delivery contexts adaptive for different user profiles of ability
and
preference.  Compare with XForms.

At 06:44 AM 2001-10-20 , Simon Evans wrote:
>On Thu, 18 Oct 2001 20:48:18 -0400, you wrote:
>
>>I think you're contributions along with jonethon and anne's would be
>>most welcome.
>
>Thanks.
>
>One of the sites I've hurriedly developed with a concentration on
>inclusion is my school's homepage. Much of the content is proprietary
>and under Win/IE at least there are a number of accessibility issues
>resulting from the use of MSAgent/VBScript, frames and browser
>controls. I am in the process of building in a validated route for
>parents and teachers with access needs, but where the kids (with
>SLD/PMLD and Autism) are concerned, its the Flash, Agents and such
>which hold the interest and provide interactive capabilities, very
>useful features like free TTS across the site and also a flavour of
>future interfaces and voice command/control. Some real annoyances in
>evidence for many standard users are extremely useful where the pupils
>are accessing from a standard machine... disabling right-click,
>full-screen browser and auto-forwarding and being good examples of
>taboos which simplify and facilitate in the case of our users.
>
>Definitely not an example of accessibility in the current sense, but
>equally its the only site I know of which all my pupils can access via
>a standard browser and access hardware (touchscreen, key sending
>switches and various pointing devices). 
>
>I know why the main site is fundamentally inaccessible and don't
>expect high marks for the code quality (no lectures required <G>).
>I've checked the site on Opera/NS+6/IE and Lynx but little else as
>yet...if there's any constructive advice I'd welcome it, but really
>I'd like to see degradable alternatives to the proprietary content,
>which are realistically achievable by average developers...in
>particular cross platform agent interfaces and free TTS solutions.
>
><http://www.sldonline.org/Kingsbury/>http://www.sldonline.org/Kingsbury/
>
>
>Regards,
>Simon
>  
Received on Saturday, 20 October 2001 12:35:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:58 GMT