- From: William Loughborough <wloughborough@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 03:27:50 -0700
- To: EOWG <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <1e3451610905010327h329fb3ednf1d488e37355b36@mail.gmail.com>
For some reason I hadn't latched onto "Web Accessibility Benefits People With and Without Disabilities" as a "cause celebre" and it calls attention to what our goals are: Web4All. Some of the language tends to play to our stereotyping of PWD and "elders"; e.g. "Yet the accessibility provisions that make the Web accessible also benefit older people with diminishing abilities." Of course everybody's abilities are diminishing and particularizing "older people" in some sense contributes to marginalization/exclusion. It has always plagued society that we attend to differences so much. Even today women are separated (but not equalized) *because* they are too ___________ (emotional/weak or some pejorative or other). This is an area where we could improve things by what words we use. That I have gotten to a condition of visual ability that precludes my even seeing the text when the color contrast is too low should not be seen as something inherent in me (although it is a condition I share with many), but as a responsibility for provision of inclusion by authors, and more importantly, authoring tools. In a sense, by promulgating the attitudes towards "others" through focusing on their "disabilities" we risk maintaining systems of separation amongst us all. The point I keep harping on is that exclusion, through incarceration (think "nursing home"), or simple shunning (and even ridicule) is perpetuated through the language we use to label one another. Hence my subscription to the first quote above. Love.
Received on Friday, 1 May 2009 10:28:34 UTC