RE: Defining the needs of people with CD

> I am sorry that members have difficulty understanding what the needs of
> people that are cognitively challenged are.

That is not a fair characterization of the members of this group.

> This is not a fault of Anne or mine.

You are not doing any better a job at articulating what the guidelines
should be (with regard to CD) than anyone else.

> Creating guidelines that solve this issue is a fantasy.

You may be correct about that, but if you feel that way, why continue this
thread on the GL list?

> People are individuals and have individual abilities and needs.
> If we could define the problem, we'd be out of a job.
> Trying to create solutions is a job for all, and there is almost nothing
> that can be said, that will help.
>
> It's a case of action.
>
> If you think you've created, or found a site that's of interest and
> accessible, especially if it links to others similar, we'd love to know.
>
> In the meantime the reality is that the Guidelines are a mile away from
> meeting that need.
> P1 compliance is not relevant currently.

Another broad statement that, without context, is provably not true.

I assume you mean something like:
"P1 compliance is not relevant currently to addressing the needs the
cognitively challenged."
Which I also disagree with, but at least I don't find needlessly
provocative!

If you want to make P1 compliance [more] relevant [to the cognitively
challenged], try your hand at drafting appropriate checkpoints!

It is patently unfair to make complaints without suggesting something
tangible in the way of improvement!

> jay@peepo.com
>
> Jonathan Chetwynd
> special needs teacher and
> web accessibility consultant.

Received on Friday, 17 March 2000 09:37:36 UTC