W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > July to September 1998

Re: A few thoughts on alternative rendering

From: Scott Luebking <phoenixl@netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 22:39:24 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199809280539.WAA02474@netcom14.netcom.com>
To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Hi,
Let me give a little background on why I brought up my suggestion on
a statement on inaccessibility in the guidelines.  I'm not sure if the
subject has been brought up with other people on this list, but
several people have been talking to me about the work the access board
will be doing on 508 and technology access.

My impression is that Congress has assigned the task of determining what
accessible technology means to the access board to reach various objectives
of 508.  Since the browser is a key piece of current technology, it is
not unreasonable to assume that the access board may have to define what
accessible browser/s is/are.

What I've been asked on a couple of occassions is whether the guidelines
can be used to define parameters of an accessible browser.  My point
has been that currently the guidelines are just guidelines but do not
necessarily define what an accessible browser is.

The question becomes what organization is best qualified to say what is
an accessible browser.  I believe that this group is probably more
qualified since the technical knowledge is so specialized.  A suggestion
I've been toying with for the guidelines is an appendix listing what
features should be included when some law/regulation requires that an
accessible browser be specified or defined.

The issue has some similarity to determining what blind access means in
an elevator.  From what I was told, some elevator developer(s) took
positions that blind access was not their responsibility or that they
should have the right to determine the degree of accessibility since it
was going to affect their bottom line.  Also, why do elevators have
redundant coding in both raised numbers and braille?  The blind people
who prefer raised numbers may have told elevators developers that raised
numbers were only needed.  Braille users may have demanded braille or
they would not consider  the elevator to be accessible.  Also, there
seems to be no provisions in elevators for blind people with neuropathy.

Scott
Received on Monday, 28 September 1998 01:39:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 13 July 2018 11:53:07 UTC