Re: FW: Revision to Web Accessibility Policy

Despite being engaged in the process of coming up with
a set of minimum conformance criteria I have a lot of
sympathy for Kynn's view.
My reasoning may be slightly different however.
As stated in this post [1] which went unanswered, how
much do we know about the difficulties disabled people
have using the web?
Do we know enough to create a set of minimum
Guidelines which will effectively meet the needs of
those (disabled web site users) for whom they are
designed to benefit?
Having bought the Nielsen Norman report and having
skim read it I have been astounded by how relevant it
is to what we are up to in this group.
Can we afford to ignore it?
No, I am not on commission <grin>

Cheers
Graham

[1]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2001OctDec/0156.html

<snip>
<Kynn>
> I agree that there are differences, but I don't
> agree that this group --
> which is not at all representative of those
> audiences -- should be the
> ones to issue guidelines for those groups.  W3C
> should not be in the
> position of dictating requirements in areas for
> which we don't have the
> appropriate expertise to comment.
> 
> Higher education web developers and policymakers
> should set educational
> web accessibility standards.  Government web
> developers and policymakers
> should set government web accessibility standards. 
> E-commerce web
> developers and policymakers should set e-commerce
> web accessibility
> standards.  And so on.
> 
> And they should do so using the WCAG 2.0 framework
> as a basis for
> setting those policies.


=====
'Making on-line information accessible'
Mobile Phone : +64 25 919 724 - New Zealand
Work Phone : +64 9 846 6995 - New Zealand
AIM ID : grahamolivernz

____________________________________________________________
Nokia Game is on again. 
Go to http://uk.yahoo.com/nokiagame/ and join the new
all media adventure before November 3rd.

Received on Friday, 26 October 2001 04:34:11 UTC