Re: Conforming alternative for mobile should not be Desktop

On 28/06/2016 18:05, ALAN SMITH wrote:
> +1 with David’s comment.
>
> It says to me “mobile accessibility is not needed”.
>
> I had the same thoughts of this indicating we can scrap all the work of
> the Mobile Accessibility task force.

One of the main problems I see with this whole rhetoric is: you're still 
talking about "mobile vs desktop" as if those were two nicely separate, 
distinct silos. They're not. We need to move away from treating 
something as "mobile accessibility" and instead qualify it more 
specifically as being "touchscreen accessibility", "small-screen 
accessibility", etc. Already there are plenty of device in the market 
today (such as 2-in-1 laptops) which blur the line, but still require 
SCs and Guidelines that apply to new input/display/etc methods available.

P
-- 
Patrick H. Lauke

www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke

Received on Tuesday, 28 June 2016 17:18:43 UTC