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

Re: Multiple versions of a web page

From: Scott Luebking <phoenixl@sonic.net>
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 08:19:58 -0800
Message-Id: <200112241619.fBOGJwYu013554@newbolt.sonic.net>
To: kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com, phoenixl@sonic.net, poehlman1@home.com, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Hi,

The statement:

    "If one follows the guidelines for the end result no matter how that
    end result is achieved and if that end result validates and if
    propper human judgement is employed, than the accessibility as a
    result of that effort is vastly improved."

in a way goes back to the question that I was asked by some CHI-WEB
people, especially in light of Jakob Nielsen's report.  How much
is accessibility improved by the guidelines?  How is this improvement
measured?  Why did Jakob Nielsen's report have its own list of
recommendations?

I also believe that my statement on who serves who is not being
understood within the context it was made.

Scott

> I was answering part of the message not all of it.  There are a lot of
> assumptions being made here and I was addressing one of them.
> Accessibility in the broadest senxe is not an absolute target nor is it
> absolutely obtainable but a couple of things I know.  If one follows the
> guidelines for the end result no matter how that end result is achieved
> and if that end result validates and if propper human judgement is
> employed, than the accessibility as a result of that effort is vastly
> improved.  This is not rocket science.  Creating an accessible end
> product under most circumstances confining that accessibility to what
> the guidelines document was meant to do no matter how it is achieved
> will serve the purpose.  A multi-model end is a fair way to achieve
> this.  We have enough anechdotal andother evidence now to answer all the
> questions about this topic going back several years and the original
> poster should do some reading to see what questions should really be
> asked.  Following this thread you end up with my post because the rest
> has already been covered in one way or another and As I said, we serve
> the technology so that it can serve us.  I will go further to say that
> if we ever get to the point where the technology truly serves us as the
> poser of the question asks, we will become subserviant to the technology
> which may not be a bad thing depending on how much benevolence we build
> into it.  I would not want to live in that world however.
Received on Monday, 24 December 2001 11:20:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:59 GMT