W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2012

Re: is javascript considered good wacg 2.0 practice?

From: Ramón Corominas <listas@ramoncorominas.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 11:42:32 +0100
Message-ID: <50CEF718.8000105@ramoncorominas.com>
To: accessys@smart.net
CC: W3C WAI ig <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Hello, Bob and all,

Again, you are mixing concepts that have nothing to do with accessibility.

You are wrongly using the release date to prove your software is modern, 
but the release date does not serve, because this software has no 
support for new technologies. Today's Web includes rich interfaces, 
social interaction and multimedia. You have a brand new bike that is not 
prepared to be used on a highway.

Of course there is a gap between the developing world and the developed 
one, but it has nothing to do with accessibility or WCAG.

If the Internet connection in Africa or Southamerica is bad, it is a 
problem for everyone living there, not only for people with disabilities 
living there. They don't have highways, and therefore it might be more 
practical to use a bike or even walk. But that's true for all of them, 
not only for people with disabilities.

If the problem is security risks, they are exactly the same for 
everyone, not only for people with disabilities. If a psychopath uses 
the highway as a shotting gallery, everyone will have the same equal 
opportunities to be killed.

If the problem is the cost of a new computer capable of running certain 
software, it is a matter of poverty, not of disability. Yes, in some 
countries it may happen that people with disabilities have higher 
poverty rates, but that is again another different issue which requires 
policy and social solutions, not technical solutions. In this case, 
adapted cars exist that cost the same as non-adapted cars.

WCAG is a technical document and it targets technical issues that relate 
to the specific circumstances of people with disabilities. WCAG is not 
intended to cover general problems that could affect everyone. This is 
clearly stated in the first paragraph of the WCAG 2.0 abstract:

"Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 covers a wide range of 
recommendations for making Web content more accessible. Following these 
guidelines will make content accessible to a wider range of people with 
disabilities, including blindness and low vision, deafness and hearing 
loss, learning disabilities, cognitive limitations, limited movement, 
speech disabilities, photosensitivity and combinations of these. 
Following these guidelines will also often make your Web content more 
usable to users in general."

Note the last sentence. The guidelines will often be good for everyone, 
but it does not mean that they are aimed at everyone's needs.

So please stop mixing access problems with accessibility barriers.


Bob wrote:

 > there are many reasons why someone would chose to run a non graphic
 > operating system, system bandwidth, adaptive software, $$$ and others.
 > I like it because it is almost totally immune to hacks, advertising,
 > and other malware.  not to mention it is easy to use with eMACspeak
 > and other text to speech software.
 > so please do not put people down because they are using something
 > unfamiliar, heck a quick google search would find all the information
 > I have presented.
Received on Monday, 17 December 2012 10:43:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:47 UTC