- From: phoenixl <phoenixl@sonic.net>
- Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 21:12:20 -0800
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Hi, This kind of goes back to some hard issues of values. Is it appropriate to make something harder for a person with a single disability because they may have the same disability as someone who has additional disabilities or is it appropriate to make it harder for someone with multiple disabilities than it is for someone with a single disability? A naive answer might be that designers can make it equally easy for both people. While this might be achievable in some situations, it is most likely requires additional resources to accomplish this. Forcing the use of a single web page format brings up these questions. I think that until some effort is put into looking at various potential categorizations, it probably doesn't make sense to look at how to handle such aspects of user/browser specification of features. Scott > 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
Received on Saturday, 23 March 2002 00:12:21 UTC