W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2014

Re: Undoubtedly, an oversimplification ...

From: Senthil kumar Nagappan <senthil.nagappan@me.com>
Date: Sat, 03 May 2014 11:09:44 -0400
Message-id: <E770166F-9981-4542-BF29-A90809FA8506@me.com>
Cc: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>, "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
To: "accessys@smart.net" <accessys@smart.net>

Well said Bob. No body cares what users want just everyone influencing the design and users needs are never addressed. This is the main reason for for a system to fail.

Regards,
Senthil Nagappan
Ph: +1 571 403 0835

> On May 3, 2014, at 10:23 AM, accessys@smart.net wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> amen.
> 
> I am over 50 and have used what has passed for the web since the mid 70's (different name and way of working) and it has gotten worse at least it seems for people with disabilities almost every year since,   so much eye candy and stuff moving around and using bandwidth that the content often gets lost in the mess.
> 
> I am speaking for myself here but I have heard this especially from older people, some have just thrown up their hands and turned away from the web completely.
> 
> everyone seems to have to out do the last guy as to how complex one can make a simple concept..  "shared communication and access to data"  it has turned more into an entertainment medium (nothing wrong with entertainment) and as much as not a economic generator with the concept of "Sharing" going by the wayside.
> 
> sometimes I wonder if I have saved or lost more time because of the web?
> 
> (and I shall crawl off my soapbox)
> Bob
> 
> 
>> On Sat, 3 May 2014, David Woolley wrote:
>> 
>> Date: Sat, 03 May 2014 09:35:47 +0100
>> From: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
>> To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
>> Subject: Re: Undoubtedly, an oversimplification ...
>> Resent-Date: Sat, 03 May 2014 08:35:58 +0000
>> Resent-From: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
>> 
>> 
>>> On 03/05/14 01:45, Mike Elledge wrote:
>>> I would also add, and I know that I am opening myself up to the
>> 
>> + of representing the "tyranny of the majority," that an interactive web
>> + is something that users want, especially given that the appropriate use
>> 
>> Most ordinary users I talk to, particularly those over 50, don't like modern web sites.
>> 
>> + JavaScript. The most recent WebAim survey bears this out--where 97.6% of
>> + respondents had JS turned on, and those who did not were a combination
>> 
>> More correctly, most hadn't turned it off.  The majority of people do not have a clear understanding of what Javascript is, and don't realise it is possible to create web sites that don't need it.  I think a lot the disabled don't complain about the web because they assume that what is out there is all that is possible.
>> 
>> Of the rest, most leave it on because the vast majority of web sites break without its being enabled.  You should count me as a non-Javascript person, but I now have it enabled by default because it is impracticable to use the modern web without it.  As such, your survey would have recorded me as pro-Javascript.
>> 
>> 
> 
Received on Saturday, 3 May 2014 15:10:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:51 UTC