- From: Al Gilman <asgilman@access.digex.net>
- Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 09:01:18 -0400 (EDT)
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org, w3c-wai-eo.org@access2.digex.net
----- Forwarded message from Anne Pemberton ----- From owner-webwatch-l@teleport.com Thu Aug 27 08:42:08 1998 Received: from smtp2.teleport.com (smtp2.teleport.com [192.108.254.20]) by pony-2.mail.digex.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id IAA04542; Thu, 27 Aug 1998 08:42:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by smtp2.teleport.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA26665; Thu, 27 Aug 1998 05:36:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by smtp2.teleport.com (bulk_mailer v1.5); Thu, 27 Aug 1998 05:35:04 -0700 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp2.teleport.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id FAA25905 for webwatch-l-outgoing; Thu, 27 Aug 1998 05:35:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980827084046.007a8960@apembert.pop.crosslink.net> X-Sender: apembert@apembert.pop.crosslink.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 08:40:46 -0400 To: webwatch-l@teleport.com From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@crosslink.net> Subject: RE: webwatch-l Re: Web Page Accessibility (fwd) In-Reply-To: <000501bdd131$55840500$ca557392@dmc.cast.org> References: <002801bdcf14$68114620$d3f2fea9@gregg> Sender: owner-webwatch-l@teleport.com Reply-To: webwatch-l@teleport.com Precedence: bulk David, I read with interest your response to Judith. I have a problem with one of your remarks: At 04:37 PM 8/26/1998 -0400, David wrote: >onloy detect errors that do not require human judgement. More often than not >these are related to visual impairments, but these can be applicable to >other disabilities, like LD. The thing Bobby checks for are based on the >working draft of the Page Author Guidelines developed by the Web Access >Initiative (http://www.w3.org/WAI/) The number of LD people who are aided by hearing the text of the web read to them exclusive of any graphical content is a very small percentage of the LD population - and even in this tiny percentage, the graphics are important to context. These people, more than others, NEED the graphics to explain the content of the text, and yet comments like above give the impression that LD folks can be accomodated by avoiding or ommitting the graphics. This isn't the case. I've read the working draft of the Guidelines and found no mention whatsoever of accomodations for those who depend on graphics to interpret text... The guidelines give a false sense of accomodations by focusing on avoiding graphics and other page organizers (like frames). I got the sense from reading the guidelines that a page of text unrelieved with graphics would be considered "accomdating" when in fact it isn't to many/most LD folks, mentally challenged folks, and poor readers. This is a fairly new topic for me, brought about by observing the difficulties of the LD folks I know and love to access information from the web. I was told recently, that LD's don't "deserve" accomodations, because they aren't/haven't worked for them as much as the visually impaired have. I sincerely hope that that was a gratuitous remark that doesn't reflect the the feelings of everyone else involved in accomodations. Anne Anne L. Pemberton http://www.erols.com/stevepem Curator, Academy One on Virginia's PEN http://www.pen.k12.va.us/Anthology/Pav/Academy1 Associate, Technology Plus http://www.erols.com/technology.plus apembert@crosslink.net ----- End of forwarded message from Anne Pemberton -----
Received on Thursday, 27 August 1998 08:59:01 UTC