- From: Adam Victor Reed <areed2@calstatela.edu>
- Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:05:19 -0700
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
I am sad to see the following on this list (addressed to a list member who was making a relevant technical point): > > If you don't have time or inclination to contribute positively, for goodness sake get out of the way. > I believe the concern, that sites attempting to accomodate one disability might gratuitously disable users with other disabilities, is valid in BOTH directions. Perhaps instead of squabbling, we might explore solutions. This could be an appropriate application for content-negotiation technology, which is already being used to secure appropriate content for different media, languages, character-sets etc. This would require the client-browser to send an HTTP header such as Accomodate: cd2 (meaning "accomodate cognitively disabled persons functioning at 2nd grade level"); or Accomodate: add (meaning "accomodate attention deficits - no amination, no irrelevant or repetitious content"); or Accomodate: fmd (meaning "accomodate fine motor deficit") etc. This header would then be used on the server to find or produce the most appropriate version of the requested content. Most of the technology is already in place in current HTTP servers. Should it not be applied to accomodate disabilities, just as it is already being used to accomodate different character-sets etc.? -- Adam Reed areed2@calstatela.edu Context matters. Seldom does *anything* have only one cause.
Received on Monday, 23 April 2001 19:05:38 UTC