W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2004

RE: Accessibility definition, was focus

From: <David.Pawson@rnib.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 08:31:54 +0100
Message-ID: <9B66BBD37D5DD411B8CE00508B69700F06FFDECE@pborolocal.rnib.org.uk>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org

From the diagram, SVG version.

I agree that legal requirements impact accessibility generation, but should
they be a part of its definition?
Same with costs. Given sufficient spend, we could all write accessible
content.

Special needs. Are these more related to requirements or understanding than
defining accessibility?

Scalability? What impact does scale have on accessibility, as far as
definition goes?
I'd say unrelated.

Device independence in general may aid accessibility, does it help define
it?

Standards in general aid accessibility but do they help define it? 

That leaves usability under a heading of total width, Universal
Accessibility.

Usable by whom? Does a definition have to relate to a given audience? E.g. I
design a piece of content with sighted and blind people in mind. I forget /
ignore
other disabilities. Is that accessible? Most authors design content to be
accessible
to the audience they expect or seek. Mostly that ignores other audiences.
Which part
of this helps to define accessibility as you mean it?

Perhaps shades of grey are called for in working towards the universal goal?
How
about segmenting or scaling such that content might be defined as accessible
for
a majority of this group and that group, but the author has not addressed
the other group.
Does that help? It might help understanding.

Device independence helps, though for a definition, or to aid understanding
I'd suggest
that *why* device independence is important is key. Reading maps with a
mouse is great
for groups A B and C. For those using other access devices the maps are
inaccessible. 
  Consideration for alternative input and output devices need to be
addressed, or something
similar might address the issue of web accessibility. You don't say which
media you're
addressing so I won't go there.

summary.

Who is your audience for this definition?
What media are you addressing?
How do you want the definition to be used? By authors? By bean counters? By
publishers?

I seem to be asking more questions than giving answers. 

HTH DaveP.

** snip here **

-- 
DISCLAIMER: 

NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments is 
confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended 
recipient you should not use, disclose, distribute or copy any of the 
content of it or of any attachment; you are requested to notify the 
sender immediately of your receipt of the email and then to delete it 
and any attachments from your system. 

RNIB endeavours to ensure that emails and any attachments generated by 
its staff are free from viruses or other contaminants. However, it 
cannot accept any responsibility for any  such which are transmitted.
We therefore recommend you scan all attachments. 

Please note that the statements and views expressed in this email and 
any attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily represent 
those of RNIB. 

RNIB Registered Charity Number: 226227 

Website: http://www.rnib.org.uk 
Received on Thursday, 10 June 2004 03:32:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:13:33 UTC