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

Re: Accessible _content_ management

From: Andrew Kirkpatrick <andrew_kirkpatrick@wgbh.org>
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 09:25:47 -0400
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
CC: David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <B945D09B.12E2F%andrew_kirkpatrick@wgbh.org>

David,
I would say that the information is not accessible to the person you
describe below, and I would agree that it is not useable for that reason.
However, even if the information was available for that person's tools, it
wouldn't necessarily be very usable, would it?

An additional example that I think about when trying to make a distinction
between accessibility and usability is a Web page with a very long top
navigation -- 50 links before the content.  Is this an accessibility issue
or a usability issue?  You could argue that this page is accessible (let's
assume that it is standard, valid XHTML), but that for people using
assistive technologies, this page has usability issues.  Yes, you can get
all of the information, but it is a pain to do so.

Andrew


On 6/30/02 11:20 PM,  David Poehlman (poehlman1@comcast.net) wrote:

> ...also applies to the output of a software product for instance, If the
> output is accessible/available but not usable by someone either because
> it is proprietary or is not manipulatible by available tools, available
> being person centric, that information is not accessible in the sense in
> which we form the answer to the question of what is accessible.


> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Andrew Kirkpatrick" <andrew_kirkpatrick@wgbh.org>
> To: "wai-ig list" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
> Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2002 9:38 PM
> Subject: Re: Accessible _content_ management
> 
> 
> 
> This brings up a question of semantics -- does accessibility imply
> "usable by a person with a disability" or
> just that the "information is available to people with disabilties (or
> their user agents)"?
> 
> If you believe that accessiblity is simply making the information
> (content, structure) available for users, then
> the greater challenge is ensuring that the information is provided in
> such a way so that all users, including
> those with disabilities can easily understand and make use of the
> information.  For example, FrontPage
> might have every aspect of the application be designed so that the
> information in each dialog box and
> interface element is available.  If a user with a screen reader needed
> to access a part of the interface that
> allows him to insert a link into a web page, but it was very difficult
> to find (it worked fine once found), is the
> application less accessible, or less useable for that person?
> 
> In the end, I believe that we are all interested in the same end point,
> but I find it useful to have clarity on
> this point, particularly when talking with people not regularly involved
> with accessibility.  Does accessibility
> fall under usability or does it exist along side usability, but focused
> on people with disabilities?  I'm interested
> to hear what others think about this.
> 
> Thanks,
> Andrew
> 
> 
> 6/29/2002 2:07:44 PM, kynn-eda@idyllmtn.com wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Jon wrote:
>>> Thought for today:
>>> Which is more accessible; Notepad or FrontPage?
>> 
>> Accessible by _whom_?  That the question -- accessibility does not
>> exist in a vacuum, it is a function involving human beings.
>> 
>> --Kynn
>> 
>> 
> Andrew
> 
> --
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
> CPB/WGBH National Center for Accessible Media
> 125 Western Ave.
> Boston, MA  02134
> E-mail: andrew_kirkpatrick@wgbh.org
> Web site: ncam.wgbh.org
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Andrew Kirkpatrick
CPB/WGBH National Center for Accessible Media
125 Western Ave.
Boston, MA  02134
E-mail: andrew_kirkpatrick@wgbh.org
Web site: ncam.wgbh.org

617-300-4420 (direct voice/FAX)
617-300-3400 (main NCAM)
617-300-2489 (TTY)

WGBH enriches people's lives through programs and services that educate,
inspire, and entertain, fostering citizenship and culture, the joy of
learning, and the power of diverse perspectives.
Received on Monday, 1 July 2002 09:26:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:05 GMT