- From: Jonathan Chetwynd <jay@peepo.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 09:01:08 -0000
- To: "Scott Luebking" <phoenixl@netcom.com>, "Anne Pemberton" <apembert@crosslink.net>, "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@w3.org>
- Cc: "Nir Dagan" <nir@nirdagan.com>, "w3c" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Anne and myself have been raising the fact that the WAI site is inaccessible to non-techy readers, and that the guidelines are far too biased towards blind disabilities, for a number of months. There is little evidence of any action being taken. I realise that present members may not have the necessary skills. However burying oneself in the current deluge of 3.1, 3.1a, 3.1aa etc is not helpful or indicative of an intention to change. It may be essential, but is not addressing what we see as the main problem. Thanking you all for your good intentions and willingness to change. What changes are being proposed, for discussion? jay@peepo.com Jonathan Chetwynd Special needs teacher / web accessibility consultant education and outreach working group member, web accessibility initiative, W3C ----- Original Message ----- From: Scott Luebking <phoenixl@netcom.com> To: <apembert@crosslink.net>; <charles@w3.org>; <jay@peepo.com>; <phoenixl@netcom.com> Cc: <nir@nirdagan.com>; <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2000 4:16 PM Subject: Re: Does the user know for sure whether the page is dynamic or > Hi, Anne > > The comment was a general solution to a problem. There are of course > situations where it may not always be true. I'm also very dependent on > visual information, but I believed that bringing up the issues of people > who are dependent on visual information would have been distracting from the > main point I was making. My goal was not to solve all possible conflicts. > > Scott > > > > > Scott, > > > > That would be true only if the *only* disability that affected web use was > > blindness. As you know it isn't, and the needs of some sighted folks are > > for the very features that exclude or annoy the blind user. During the > > summer there was a lengthy discussion of the needs of one of the largest > > groups of disabled users, and Jonathan, myself, and others pointed out that > > text itself is sometimes a barrier, and that text without the visual cues > > (varied size, bold titles and subtitles, brackets and parentheses, > > quotation marks, etc.) often render text as difficult to navigate or > > totally useless to many persons whose disabilities are cognitively based. > > Although my own cognitive differences are minor, I am a very visual person, > > and I have difficulty with posts to this list where the words <quote> and > > <unquote> are inserted in the text. I have to read the post several times > > to get the meaning. My husband, with significant cognitive differences, > > would just skip the whole thing as unreadable. Even tho my husband is > > "visually impaired" due to loss of one eye and ripening cataracts on the > > other, he is graphically visual rather than textually visual. The > > guidelines that are supposed to help dyslexic web users do him no good at > > all. > > > > Whether the pages are generated dynamically or statically doesn't change > > that fact, unless there is something unique about dynamically-generated > > pages that I am unaware of. If the graphics, multi-media, and visual cues > > are absent, the meaning isn't conveyed. > > > > Anne > >
Received on Friday, 28 January 2000 04:04:11 UTC