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

RE: Feedback on accessibility techniques for cognitive disabiliti es

From: Scarlett Julian (ED) <Julian.Scarlett@sheffield.gov.uk>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 13:55:12 -0000
Message-ID: <F9BE3B1AB649D311A573009027852E4D01E346FA@EDUC_MXS>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
There is
> very little research into difficulties that people with cognitive
> disabilities have using the internet. This is reflected in 
> the comparative
> lack of emphasis that their needs are given in accessibility 
> guidelines.

It may also be because sensory disabilities don't tend to stop people from
putting their point of view and making people take notice of them. By their
very nature cognitive difficulties make it less likely that someone will
stick up for their rights or make noises about what they want/need. 


J.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Newbery [mailto:jamesnewbery@ukconnect.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 1:24 PM
> To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Feedback on accessibility techniques for cognitive
> disabiliti es
> 
> 
> First of all, we need to understand exactly what differences in
> accessibility needs might result in conflicting design 
> priorities. There is
> very little research into difficulties that people with cognitive
> disabilities have using the internet. This is reflected in 
> the comparative
> lack of emphasis that their needs are given in accessibility 
> guidelines.
> Additionally, as Graham has pointed out, 'cognitive 
> disabilities' cover an
> enormous range of impairment, so investigations in this area 
> are likely to
> be lengthy and full of ambiguity.
> 
> It seems to make common sense that there *are* going to be a number of
> conflicts. It then becomes that much more important that we 
> understand who
> our users are, and how they use the web, so that potential 
> conflicts can be
> resolved on an informed basis.
> 
> This serves to remind us that accessibility guidelines are 
> good at telling
> us what design aspects to include, but not at telling us 
> exactly why we are
> including them. This is largely common sense when it comes to 
> supporting
> physical and sensory impairments, which are socially 
> 'obvious' and easier
> for people to comprehend. When it comes to cognitive 
> disabilities, however,
> design 'common sense' is harder to come by, because judgments 
> must be made
> about something that people often find difficult to 
> comprehend. For example,
> I find it harder imagine what it might be like to have 
> learning difficulties
> than what it might be like to have visual impairment. I 
> personally think
> that a set of design guidelines are less informative for 
> design (and less
> interesting) than an understanding of the barriers and 
> facilitators that
> people face in day to day life.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of Scarlett Julian (ED)
> Sent: 26 February 2002 09:48
> To: 'w3c-wai-ig@w3.org'
> Subject: RE: Feedback on accessibility techniques for cognitive
> disabiliti es
> 
> 
> I seem to have missed out on the previous posts on this subject. The
> comments in general seem to be what I would call common sense 
> useability
> issues (note that I recognise that not everyone, and certainly not web
> designers, has or uses common sense). What interests me more is David
> Brewer's statement that he can foresee a battle between 
> disability groups on
> a sensory/cognitive split that will enable "web access issues 
> to be skirted
> by designers". Putting aside the fact that the majority of 
> designers skirt
> these issues already, how can we avoid David's perceived battleground
> becoming yet another get-out clause for web developers? It is 
> obvious that
> there are very real and different issues for different groups 
> of disabled
> users - how do we marry them all? Do we even try?
> 
> Julian
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lisa Seeman [mailto:seeman@netvision.net.il]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 4:35 PM
> To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> Subject: Fw: Feedback on accessibility techniques for 
> cognitive disabilities
> 
> 
> 
> interesting
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Elaina Sitaras
> To: seeman@netvision.net.il
> Cc: smb23@cornell.edu
> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 1:23 PM
> Subject: Feedback on accessibility techniques for cognitive 
> disabilities
> 
> 
> Lisa,
> 
> I am very sorry that I did not send this out last week as Susanne had
> indicated.
> Attached to this email you should find two documents -- one with the
> comments and the other with the contact information for those who
> contributed.
> 
> Elaina Sitaras
> 
> 
> 
> X-Sender: smb23@postoffice4.mail.cornell.edu (Unverified)
> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
> Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 19:04:45 -0500
> X-PH: V4.1@postoffice2.mail.cornell.edu (Cornell Modified)
> To: Lisa Seeman <seeman@netvision.net.il>
> From: Susanne Bruyere <smb23@cornell.edu>
> Subject: Feedback on accessibility techniques for cognitive 
> disabilities
> Cc: es48@cornell.edu (Elaina Sitaras)
> 
> Lisa,
> 
> We have not forgotten you. I sent your guidelines off to our 
> own staff, and
> also to four colleagues with expertise in cognitive 
> disabilities (traumatic
> brain injury) and developmental disabilities. We have been 
> waiting to see if
> anyone else responded to us. Elaina Sitaras, our Research 
> Assistant, is
> coalescing these responses for us, and will be sending these 
> off to out
> tomorrow, from whatever feedback we have gotten. She will 
> also be sending
> the names and contact information for anyone who has 
> responded, in case you
> want to get back to them with questions. We hope that this will be of
> assistance.
> 
> Susanne Bruyere
> 
> 
> At 06:24 PM 2/13/2002 -0800, you wrote:
> That is fantastic,
> Thanks
> The information in this email is confidential. The contents may not be
> disclosed or used by anyone other than the addressee.  If you 
> are not the
> addressee, please tell us by using the reply facility in your 
> email software
> as soon as possible. Sheffield City Council cannot accept any 
> responsibility
> for the accuracy or completeness of this message as it has 
> been transmitted
> over a public network.  If you suspect that the message may have been
> intercepted or amended please tell us as soon as possible.
> 
The information in this email is confidential. The contents may not be disclosed or used by anyone other than the addressee.  If you are not the addressee, please tell us by using the reply facility in your email software as soon as possible. Sheffield City Council cannot accept any responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of this message as it has been transmitted over a public network.  If you suspect that the message may have been intercepted or amended please tell us as soon as possible.
Received on Tuesday, 26 February 2002 08:55:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:00 GMT