W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2002

Re: Testing web page accessibility by phone

From: David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 12:11:21 -0400
To: phoenixl <phoenixl@sonic.net>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-id: <000901c2072b$7959ed80$91e03244@DAVIDPOEHLMAN>

accessibility means that it is available and can be used.  time is not a
deciding factor in this.  Other factors as has been indicated on this
thread address the time issue.

----- Original Message -----
From: "phoenixl" <phoenixl@sonic.net>
To: <phoenixl@sonic.net>; <poehlman1@comcast.net>; <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 12:07 PM
Subject: Re: Testing web page accessibility by phone



Hi,

Actually, the original quote was:

    "Web pages are like cars.  you need to know how to drive before
getting
    into one."

The analogy I offered was an extension of that statement.

It would seem that different blind people have different points of views
about time being a factor of accessibility.  Some blind people feel they
are at a competitive disadvantage when it comes to being slower than
sighted people when using information technology and web pages.  The
mail I've been getting recently seems to indicate that there are blind
people who are concerned about that.  For example, blind students
needing to do research to write papers do not get three weeks to prepare
when sighted people get one week.  If it takes blind web users 4 times
as long to shop online, how many blind web users will give up?
Reasearch and testing will offer better understanding of the issues.

I have heard complaints from web developers about the W3C and the 508
documents not having the same information with regards to accessibility.
The definition of accessibility is often not readily understood by
laymen many of whom have other responsibilities besides accessibility.

Again, different blind people have differing views of accessibility.
I've been moving more towards testing rather than philosophical
arguments.

Scott

> for many people, your analogy is true.  I don't see what this has to
do
> with blindness at all.
>
> Apples and oranges.  On your point of time, This is why in this
country,
> we have regulations for test taking that level the playing field.
Doing
> a job is not the same as accessing the material.  It will never be the
> case that all equally quallified individuals will be competative in
time
> due to the ways and means of access.
>
> Returning to the topic of the web, if you look closely at all the
> specifications for authoring and software development that are
designed
> to enhance accessibility, you will find that while there are standards
> and there are guidelines and there are policies, there is much
> comonality among them.  the differences have to do with totality of
> process but if crafted carefully using these sets and drawing on
> techniques that have been proven to work and that the blind themselves
> have helped to design, we get pages that are as accessible as
possible.
> We do not and will not live in a perfect world but the best way of
> getting as close as possible is through mutual convergence toward a
goal
> and I see no use in pointing up defficiencies toward that end since
this
> ground has already been thoroughly covered the president of nfb
> notwithstanding.
>
> >From a blind man who surfs cyberspace in the dark and tries to shed
> light whereever he goes.
Received on Wednesday, 29 May 2002 12:12:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:04 GMT