Re: comments on beta accessibility page (was Re: Phrase with "from using the web" - Re: w3.beta Comments for discussion)

Interspersed pleas to get on with it. It's not as if this were stone
tablets: it can all be changed over and over if that's what we want to spend
our lives doing.

Love.

On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org> wrote:

>
> My comments are on the exchange below and on this version of the page:
>  - <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/4betaW3org/accessibility-new-w3c>


Also I don't think the version you're quibbling over is the one we came up
with that dealt with much of what you raise.


> I have several concerns with the following paragraph as it stands now:


I don't think is any longer "as it stands now"?


> "The web is a flexible medium that enables most people with impairments to
> use the web just as well as anyone. Thus, there is inherently no such thing
> as a disability using the web; the web removes barriers to communication and
> interaction for most people. However, badly written websites and web tools
> that are not accessible create barriers that exclude people."
>
> #1: "there is inherently no such thing as a disability using the web"
>  - I'm unsure what is exactly meant but this seems to be a blatant over
> claim in my opinion. I have a disability every day in using the Web,
> regardless of how accessible it is. There are limitations to what I can or
> cannot do but an inaccessible site certainly excludes me from being able to
> use it (or to use it effectively).


Of course, in a very real sense we are all unsure of what is exactly meant.
THIS WILL ALWAYS BE THE CASE. There are indeed limitations to what any of us
can or cannot do and we all, in the broadest sense, "have a
disability...using the Web." If we change these things endlessly in the
attempt to make a perfect document, we risk years of delay in getting a
useful one. "Consensus" does not mean "Unanimity" and if someone as
hard-headed as I am can stomach continued labeling, then so should more of
us. I realize we must miss certain teleconferences and that whatever we do
will always be subject to further change, particularly from those "higher in
the food chain", but perhaps we can find a way to just move on.

#2: "the web removes barriers to communication and interaction for most
> people"
>  - Note that the Web may sometimes also introduce barriers, for example for
> those who may not have access to it (broader aspects of the digital divide).
> I think Alan had noted some comments in this direction too.


The telephone and even F2F conversations may also introduce barriers.
"Doctor DUH!" and "Professor Obvious" should be avoided. Our inboxes are
full enough already <vbg>.

#3: "The web is a flexible medium that enables most people with impairments
> to use the web just as well as anyone"
>  - Does the word "most" in this sentence contradict the next sentence?


No, because the next sentence (unless you are insisting on it saying "SOME
people") merely says badly written Websites exclude people.

#4: "The web is a flexible medium that enables most people with impairments
> to use the web just as well as anyone"
>  - I'm wondering if there are specific reasons for using the term
> "impairments" rather than the term "disabilities".
>
> #5: "However, badly written websites and web tools that are not accessible
> create barriers that exclude people"
>  - I prefer this wording over "disable people", I just never felt very
> comfortable with that word-play.
>
> #6: "However, badly written websites and web tools that are not accessible
> create barriers that exclude people"
>  - Consider reiterating the point about the potential of the Web for people
> with disabilities, maybe something like "exclude people with disabilities
> from taking equal part on the Web".


If any of the proposed changes were what was in the draft, somebody would
certainly propose something very like what got replaced and this could be an
endless loop. No matter what is there, these changes will always be debated
- sometimes for a decade! We must at some point leave the choice in editors'
hands.


> #7: spelling of "web" versus "Web"
>  - Had we previously agreed that EO resources will capitalize the word
> "Web" when it is a noun (like "the [Web|web] is a flexible medium")?
>

Both this and "impairments" matter have already been addressed, but we were
dealing with non-wordsmithing items.

Let's move on - please!

Love.