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

RE: Fwd from CHI-WEB: Amazon's version for the Visually Impaired

From: Aaron Smith <aaron@gwmicro.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 11:33:31 -0500
Message-Id: <>
To: Jim Thatcher <jim@jimthatcher.com>, david.bacon@jkd.co.uk, "'Jason Megginson'" <jason@bartsite.com>, "'Scott Luebking'" <phoenixl@sonic.net>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org

I have to agree. Check out the pocketpc text in the URL:


I believe that this site was originally created for PDA's. Accessibility, 
in my opinion, was an afterthought.

At 10:16 AM 12/14/2001 -0600, Jim Thatcher wrote:
>Though someone claims that this web site was was created for people with 
>disabilities, I don't believe it. They have done none of the simplest 
>things, like labeling input elements or alt text on the one or two images 
>that appear on every page. I believe this is an experiment for a site for 
>small devices. If it were done for people using screen readers, don't you 
>think at least the alt text would have been added?
>Having said all that, I really like it! There is a feedback link near the 
>top. Twice I have sent feedback and both times a real person responded 
>with thanks.
>Accessibility Consulting
>-----Original Message-----
>From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org]On 
>Behalf Of david.bacon
>Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 8:16 AM
>To: 'Jason Megginson'; 'Scott Luebking'; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
>Subject: RE: Fwd from CHI-WEB: Amazon's version for the Visually Impaired
>I thought the label tag ruined layouts in NS6.  I've done a test page with 
>no style sheets and just a simple form in a table.  When the layout tag 
>was placed around text it jumped out of the cell and covered the form 
>element in the adjacent cell.  This bug has been documented and is 
>probably the reason the label tag is not as widely used as it should 
>be.  After all, a major flaw in layout takes precedence over accessibilty.
>David Bacon.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jason Megginson [<mailto:jason@bartsite.com>mailto:jason@bartsite.com]
>Sent: 14 December 2001 14:09
>To: 'Scott Luebking'; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
>Subject: RE: Fwd from CHI-WEB: Amazon's version for the Visually
>I found the site to be lacking attributes and tags necessary to be truly
>"accessible".  <Label for=""> and id attributes, for "explicit labeling"
>for instance, are missing.  I agree with David that if they would do it
>right the first time, an alternate site would not be needed.
>Jason Megginson
>Access Technology Specialist
>Bartimaeus Group
>-----Original Message-----
>From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org 
>[<mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org>mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On
>Behalf Of Scott Luebking
>Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 8:56 PM
>To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
>Subject: Fwd from CHI-WEB: Amazon's version for the Visually Impaired
>Date:    Thu, 13 Dec 2001 09:57:12 +0100
>Subject: Amazon's version for the Visually Impaired
>Hello all,
>Do you know that amazon.com has developped a specific version of the
>site for the Visually Impaired ?
>for an article
>and <http://www.amazon.com/access>http://www.amazon.com/access to reach 
>the site.
>When we saw it we (the usability team) say :
>- oupsss !!! (we provide an ASP software which is able to transform web
>sites in an accessible and personalized way for all the visually
>impaired (including blind and all people who need some visual comfort))
>- great !!! they did a good job and all the pages are designed in the
>good way : no more graphic (but a text only version yet exist), no more
>marketing blabla, search engine in the top and so on...
>We ask on a french list for the blind what they think about this site,
>the way it is designed and is utility... For the moment, we are very
>surprised by the answers ! Blind people do not find it so efficient :
>they have the feeling of a "poor site" and they absolutely dislike that
>there are two versions of the same site : one for "normal" people and
>one for "visually impaired" ! They think designers have to put all their
>efforts in designing one and only one site, and not to make "ghettos"
>for the blind.
>What do you think about that ?  It seems that the text only version is
>preferred because much more informations are presents !
>Someone has tested this version ?
>Is it the better way to improve accessibility (visual accessibility) ?
>And what about the URL ? Is it the good name ?
>Of course, i will try to make a summary to the list of all the answers i
>will get !
>Thank you
>PS : I am french, please excuse my english ! :)
>VirusChecked by the Incepta Group plc

Aaron Smith
GW Micro
Phone: 219/489-3671
Fax: 219/489-2608
WWW: http://www.gwmicro.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.gwmicro.com
Technical Support & Web Development
Received on Friday, 14 December 2001 11:34:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:15 UTC