W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > July to September 2004

[Intro to Web Access.] RE: Technological disabilities and Web accessibility

From: Shawn Lawton Henry <shawn@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 15:24:42 -0500
To: "'Roberto Castaldo'" <r.castaldo@iol.it>, <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000201c478ce$be743760$d4837544@SLHenry>

Roberto's complete email is included at the end of this email. I've
excerpted at top only minimal text to frame replies.

> why not including the technological... disability 

Two points:
- "technological disabilities" is not a term that is commonly understood
(I wasn't even sure what you meant until I read further :)
- we discussed keeping the main focus upfront on people with
disabilities and having the other benefits separate

> 3. Suggestion for revision: 
> My proposed wording: "Flexibility benefits all people who use 
> the Web, including people without disabilities who have 
> different preferences, people with tecnological or temporary 
> disabilities (such as a slow connection or a broken arm), and 
> older people"

How about:
"Web accessibility can also benefit organizations and people without
disabilities. For example, a key principle of Web accessibility is
flexibility to meet different needs, situations, and preferences.
Flexibility benefits all people who use the Web, including people
without disabilities in different situations (such as low bandwidth),
people with temporary disabilities (such as a broken arm), and older
people."

I wonder which is more easily understood and accurate "slow connection"
or "low bandwidth"

If anyone has any input, please sent it to the EOWG list.

~ Shawn


> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Roberto Castaldo
> Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 5:18 AM
> To: w3c-wai-eo@w3.org
> Subject: Technological disabilities and Web accessibility
> 
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I've just read the last "Introduction to Web Accessibility" version 
> 
> In section "What is Web accessibility", second paragraph
> 
> 1. Current Wording: "Web accessibility addresses all 
> disabilities, including visual, auditory, physical, speech, 
> cognitive, and neurological disabilities."
> 
> 2. Concerns: the list of disabilities doesn't seem to be exaustive
> 
> 3. Suggestion for revision: If the EO group has decided to 
> list the most important kinds of disabilities, why not 
> including the technological ones? It's a kind of disability 
> which is widely diffuse all over the world, and gives many 
> problems in using the Web. My proposed wording: ""Web 
> accessibility addresses all kinds of disabilities, including 
> visual, auditory, physical, speech, cognitive, neurological 
> and technological disabilities."
> 
> --------------------------------------
> 
> In the same section, third paragraph:
> 
> 1. Current Wording: "Flexibility benefits all people who use 
> the Web, including people without disabilities who have 
> different preferences, people with temporary disabilities 
> (such as a broken arm), and older people"
> 
> 2. Concerns: Technological problems should be presented in 
> this paragraph as a real source of disability; slow 
> connections are widely diffused, so they represent a good and 
> a simple example
> 
> 3. Suggestion for revision: 
> My proposed wording: "Flexibility benefits all people who use 
> the Web, including people without disabilities who have 
> different preferences, people with tecnological or temporary 
> disabilities (such as a slow connection or a broken arm), and 
> older people"
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Roberto Castaldo
> -----------------------------------
> www.Webaccessibile.Org coordinator
> IWA/HWG Member
> rcastaldo@webaccessibile.org
> r.castaldo@iol.it
> Mobile 348 3700161
> Icq 178709294
> ----------------------------------- 
> 
Received on Monday, 2 August 2004 16:24:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:55:52 UTC