- From: Masafumi NAKANE/中根雅文 <max@wide.ad.jp>
- Date: Wed, 05 Nov 1997 23:42:34 +0900
- To: phoenixl@netcom.com
- Cc: asgilman@access.digex.net, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org, basr-l@trace.wisc.edu, techwatch@trace.wisc.edu
- Cc: max@wide.ad.jp
> What I originally brought up is whether forms could be
> considered accessible to blind people. Some aspects are:
I guess these aspects can be considered as to say if web pages in
general, not just forms, are accessible.
I've thought a bit about these:
> 1. If some blind computer users can access forms, are they
> accessible?
I think so.
> 2. If a person has a preferred screen reader which doesn't
> work with forms, are they accessible?
I think forms (or like I said, such web pages) are accessible.
Instead, the screen-reader in question is, in a way, inaccessible.
> 3. If it takes blind computer users three times longer to use
> forms than sighted users, are forms accessible?
> 4. If blind users make more errors using forms than sighted
> users, are forms accessible?
Maybe yes, maybe no. In such case, we must also look at the
possibility that it may be the browser or the screen reader's
implementation that are making it inaccessible or less accessible.
Reading this thread, I came to think that we need to make it clear
what accessibility is. Maybe we should define what accessible web
pages are, what accessible browsers are, probably and what accessible
screen-readers are. I think if you have an environment where either
of these aren't accessible, then maybe WWW for you isn't truly
accessible although it might be accessible enough.
Cheers,
Max
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Masafumi NAKANE, Keio Univ., Dept. of Environmental Information
E-Mail : max@wide.ad.jp / max@FreeBSD.ORG
[URL] : http://www.sfc.wide.ad.jp/~max/
Received on Wednesday, 5 November 1997 09:46:56 UTC