W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > July to September 2000

Re: usability/accessibility

From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2000 12:28:07 -0700
Message-Id: <a04320404b58682fbd7d1@[10.0.1.2]>
To: love26@gorge.net, Evaluation & Repair Interest Group <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>, E & O <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
At 8:42 AM -0700 7/3/00, William Loughborough wrote:
>In the past when we talk about the "accessibility of tools" we have been
>talking about whether they work with screen readers, etc. We must also
>examine their accessibility for Web authors in general.

I worry that this goes beyond our mandate and risks confusing the
issues as well as weakening the force of our message.

We have not yet even won the "make images accessible" battle -- I
don't think it's time to start preaching that "to make your web
sites accessible to people with disabilities, you must improve the
usability of your site to everyone."  Yes, it's a good thing to do,
but if we become the Web Usability Initiative, who will campaign for
increased access by users with disabilities?

I know the concepts are related and the lines are blurry, but there
is a danger in assuming that means it's important to encompass all
factors of "good web design."  And it makes it 1000% harder to
"enforce" if by compliance we mean "you made a -good- web page
according to the way -we- define good web pages" instead of "you
removed artificial barriers to access that prevent certain user
groups from accesisng your site."
-- 
--
Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>
http://www.kynn.com/
Received on Monday, 3 July 2000 19:10:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:55:47 UTC