- From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
- Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2022 22:03:17 +0000
- To: WCAG list <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <3AF2C195-87CA-46FC-8857-94D4D4A0546C@nomensa.com>
Hi everyone, Recently we have needed to contact group members about CEPC issues, including on github threads. We encourage everyone to read the CEPC: https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ To paraphrase a couple of items: * Never attack the person. Instead, discuss the ideas. If you find yourself saying something like “you are X” or “your perspective says X about you”, stop. An alternative approach is to work out the impact of the logic and argue on that basis. * Do not use patronizing language, e.g. "Well, actually..." * Do not assume or belittle other people’s knowledge levels. It has also become apparent that there are some disability-specific things which affect this group more than most. We all know that we are all individuals. If something works (or doesn’t) for you, that does not mean that it works (or doesn’t) for everyone else with a particular disability. Implying otherwise can be a form of dismissing other peoples’ experience. For example: “I have X disability and this solution works for me, therefore it is a good solution”, or “I have X disability and this solution is useless for me, therefore it is a bad solution.” Sharing personal experience can be very useful, but assuming it applies to others in a group is not. One approach to avoid this issue is to establish why something works. For example, “With X type of disability the solution may work for some people in Y scenario because…”. This moves the focus from individuals to why a particular solution may work. Kind regards, -Alastair
Received on Monday, 7 February 2022 22:03:32 UTC