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

RE: Media - Suit Over Airlines' Web Sites Tests Bounds of ADA

From: Julia Collins <julia@we3.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2002 15:04:42 +0100
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B9C8A489.46CB%julia@we3.co.uk>
As a web designer with a graphics background and a strong interest in
accessibility issues, I have been following this discussion with interest.
My problem is with the term "eye candy" that is being bandied around- surely
a strong visual design enhances all user experiences?  (and yes, that does
also include people who are totally blind, through the lively and
descriptive use of alt tags) It helps navigation, makes points in a way that
words sometimes cannot, (bear in mind alt tags again here...) and just makes
the getting of information not a big old book reading experience. I, for
one, haven't the mind to wander through yards of uninterrupted text.

Accessibility isn't just about those with total blindness- it's also about
people with other visual, sensory, motor and learning disabilities.

Sure, there is a lot of mindless decoration out there that is a waste of
bandwidth - and this has been a problem ever since the "democratisation" of
the design process with products like publisher (for print) and the fact you
can "publish" any old blather on the www whatever your skill levels with a
bit of dreamweaver.  Truly awful things have been done in ignorance that
offend, make inaccessible or just look plain ugly.  But like it or not,
visual design for accessibility and usability is an important part of this
discussion.  

Julia
-- 
We3

print 
design 
web
Received on Tuesday, 8 October 2002 10:00:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:07 GMT