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: David Poehlman <poehlman1@home.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 13:23:55 -0500
Message-ID: <001601c184cc$80ddd120$c2f20141@mtgmry1.md.home.com>
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
I guess we don't need ramps or widened doors or fixtures that
accommodate wheell chair users because they might hinder someone.  In
fact, the available datta suggest that web design that promotes access
is more benefitial to all.


As has been mentioned on another list, universal design is a process not
an end result and the target is you.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael R. Burks" <mburks952@worldnet.att.net>
To: "Scott Luebking" <phoenixl@sonic.net>; <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 1:07 PM
Subject: RE: Fwd from CHI-WEB: Amazon's version for the Visually
Impaired


My Answers are belwo yours marked with my intials,

Sincerely,

Mike Burks


-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org]On
Behalf Of Scott Luebking
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 12:30 PM
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: RE: Fwd from CHI-WEB: Amazon's version for the Visually
Impaired


Hi,

A number of things I'm involved with are outside of the disabled world
which exposes me to a variety of views.  So, let me ask some hard
questions about universal design.

1.  Does universal design mean that the experience of one person has to
be
    limited so that another person can have a similar experience,
    e.g. a slick, flashy design?

I would put it another way - Does my experience have to be limited
because
a designer in interested in displaying his or her skill with techniques
that
are irrelevant to the site?  I have never see any evidence that slick,
flashy, design does anything except boost the ego of the person who
designed
it.  If you go to www.useit.com you will find a good deal of hard
evidence
the reason most people are on the web.  It is not to experience slick,
flashy, design.  As has been stated on another list, often Universal
Design
is not quite as efficient for one particular group as a design which is
made
for that particular group.  However overall efficiency has increased.
More
appropriately if the user can decide how they want the content that
should
be their choice.  - MRB

2.  If there is a technique which some people can use to speed up their
    use of information, but other people can't use and will be slower
    at processing information, should the technique not be used?
    What if there is no other equivalent technique that increases
    the speed that a person can use the information?
I do not understand what you mean, you will have to be more specific. -
MRB

3.  Does a person using access technology have the same experience as
    someone not using access technology even if they are referencing
    the same web page?
Does a person who wears glasses have the same experience that a person
who
does not?  Does a sighted person have the same experience that a blind
person does?  Does a person who was born in 1947 have the same
experience
tha a person who was born in 1986 has?  Does a person from France have
the
same experience as a person from Uganda?  Does a person who is female
have
the same experience as a person who is male?  Does a person who is on
prozac
have the same experience as a person who is not?  Do you have the same
experience that I do?  No one will have the same experience as another,
so I
clearly do not understand the relevance of this question to the issues
at
hand.  - MRB



Just a few thoughts.

Scott

> Design for all, Universal Design, now we begin to see relevance of
these
> terms.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Mike Burks
Received on Friday, 14 December 2001 13:23:48 GMT

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