- From: John M Slatin <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>
- Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 09:10:12 -0600
- To: "Doyle" <doyleb@alaska.net>, <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <C46A1118E0262B47BD5C202DA2490D1A1E2FFD@MAIL02.austin.utexas.edu>
There's a difference between (a) "people with the full range of disabilities" and (b) "the full range of people with disabilities." (a) *might* be misconstrued as referring only to specific individuals who have many disabilities themselves (i.e., a person who has blindness, deafness, motor impairment, and cognitive disabilities all at once)-- though in all honesty I htink you'd have to work at it to (mis)read it this way. (b) designates a range of people, each of whom has (one or more) disabilities. I'm not necessarily arguing for "full range," but I do think (b) is clear. Perhaps "broad range of people with disabilities" or "wide range of people with disabilities" might address Doyle's concern about our seeming to claim too much if we tak about "the full range of people with disabilities." John "Good design is accessible design." Please note our new name and URL! John Slatin, Ph.D. Director, Accessibility Institute University of Texas at Austin FAC 248C 1 University Station G9600 Austin, TX 78712 ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524 email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu web http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility/ <http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility/> -----Original Message----- From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Doyle Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 10:47 pm To: gv@trace.wisc.edu; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org Subject: Re: Edit in Scope section I agree with the word ALL but still have an issue with the phrase "full range" - knowing full-well we mean all. Maybe it's the educator in me that had a problem with the term/phrase, "full inclusion" some years back. Maybe it's because the phrase will not translate well in other languages - I don't know. All types of disabilities is what we are talking about. I feel the term "full range" is a bit vague but it's not a make or break issue with me - only my opinion. Doyle Burnett ----- Original Message ----- From: Gregg Vanderheiden <mailto:gv@trace.wisc.edu> To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 3:16 PM Subject: RE: Edit in Scope section I think the objective was to say that the guidelines are meant to apply to people with all different types of disabilities. This is in contrast to guidelines that apply to some (different disabilities) but omit others. 'different types of disabilities" could mean just vision, hearing, and physical. The ALL was meant to make the goal to include all. (or at least all that can be addressed by web content design. Lower back pain and chemical sensitivity being two that are not in this category). What we had was clearly bad English. But how to do we do it well to cover all. Full range is the best I've seen of the suggestions. Implies not only types but degrees. hmmmm Gregg -- ------------------------------ Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr. Director - Trace R & D Center University of Wisconsin-Madison -----Original Message----- From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Doyle Burnett Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 2:53 PM To: Sailesh Panchang; W3C Web Content Subject: Re: Edit in Scope section I would agree with Sailesh - full range is a confusing phrase as it could be implied that a person or persons have the full range of a GIVEN disability. I feel, "usable by people having different kinds of disabilities" is the best way to present what I am guessing we're trying to say. Doyle Burnett Doyle Burnett Education and Training Specialist Multiple Disabilities Program Special Education Service Agency dburnett@sesa.org Www.sesa.org -- On 11/5/03 11:24 AM, "Sailesh Panchang" <sailesh.panchang@deque.com> wrote: Refer to WCAG 2.0 Scope. A statement reads: "...and usable by people with a full range of disabilities. " Probably what is meant is "usable by people having different kinds of disabilities" Does "people with full range" imply only those those individuals each of whom have all disabilities imaginable? Probably not. Sailesh Panchang Senior Accessibility Engineer Deque Systems,11180 Sunrise Valley Drive, 4th Floor, Reston VA 20191 Tel: 703-225-0380 Extension 105 E-mail: sailesh.panchang@deque.com Fax: 703-225-0387 * Look up <http://www.deque.com> *
Received on Thursday, 6 November 2003 10:12:59 UTC