RE: Multiple versions of a page

The problem with reasonable grouping as I see it is that it doesn’t
allow for multiple disabilities -- cause they are random.

A person can have any mix or subset of 

Low vision (many types)
Blindness
Hearing Impairments (many types)
Deafness
Physical disabilities (many types)
Cognitive disabilities
Language disabilities 
Seizure disorders
Or all of the above (and I have had clients with all of the above)

Since you can have any combination,  how can you have 'logical
groupings" of access features?

I LIKE server side tuning for different combinations of the above.  But
unless we have a very sophisticated means to ask, discuss, negotiate and
come up with the right combination of features ---- for all browsers (or
a vast majority )  then we need  to have a default, cross disability
accessible version --- don’t we?

Gregg

-- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Human Factors 
Depts of Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 
Gv@trace.wisc.edu <mailto:Gv@trace.wisc.edu>, <http://trace.wisc.edu/> 
FAX 608/262-8848  
For a list of our listserves send “lists” to listproc@trace.wisc.edu
<mailto:listproc@trace.wisc.edu> 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On
Behalf
> Of gian@stanleymilford.com.au
> Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 9:45 PM
> To: charles@w3.org; phoenixl@sonic.net
> Cc: Lee.Otto@aspect.com.au; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Multiple versions of a page
> 
> I am sure there are some "reasonably obvious" groupings.  Why aren't
> they documented anywhere?
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: charles [mailto:charles@w3.org]
> > Sent: Tuesday, 19 March 2002 12:51 AM
> > To: phoenixl
> > Cc: Gian Sampson-Wild; Lee.Otto; w3c-wai-gl
> > Subject: RE: Multiple versions of a page
> >
> >
> > I am sure that there are a number of "reasonably obvious"
> > functionality
> > groupings. I assume that the first thing we will see is the
> > "reasonably
> > obvious" ones catered for, and later we will see more adaptive
systems
> > designed to better provide for the needs of a wide range of people.
> >
> > There is old technology available to do this. The real
> > question in my mind is
> > how to make sure that people are getting a version they can
> > use, and then
> > how to make sure they can get the version that is best for
> > them to use.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Charles McCN
> >
> > On Sat, 16 Mar 2002, phoenixl wrote:
> >
> >   Hi,
> >
> >   I'm not sure I would agree with this analysis.  I think
> > there are some
> >   inherent groupings of functionality.  For example, in general, the
> >   major group of people which is affected by tables for layout is
> >   pretty much the same group affected by javascript.
> >
> >   Scott
> >
> >   > Hi,
> >
> >   > I think Lee is right, and one major problem with having multiple
> >   > versions of a web page is that we can NEVER know the variety of
> >   > disabilities a person may have, and therefore splitting
> > an accessible
> >   > web site into several sites can end up making that site
> > essentially
> >   > inaccessible. What I mean, is that if someone needs
> > checkpoints A and B
> >   > to access a site will not be able to do so if checkpoint
> > A is solved by
> >   > Site Version 1, and checkpoint B by Site Version 3.
> >
> >   > Cheers,
> >   > Gian
> >
> >
> > --
> > Charles McCathieNevile    http://www.w3.org/People/Charles
> > phone: +61 409 134 136
> > W3C Web Accessibility Initiative     http://www.w3.org/WAI
> > fax: +33 4 92 38 78 22
> > Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia
> > (or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia
> > Antipolis Cedex, France)
> >
> >
> >

Received on Wednesday, 20 March 2002 02:32:50 UTC