- From: Leonard R. Kasday <kasday@acm.org>
- Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 10:43:13 -0500
- To: Scott Luebking <phoenixl@netcom.com>, phoenixl@netcom.com, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
>I'm not clear that it is very useful to push for the same presentation for >sighted and blind users. The issue is whether efficiency is more important or >communication. Well like I say I'm pushing for both so user has choice of the optimally formatted page like the ones your talking about, or the default page with access features, so that people with disabilities are seeing the same page. I believe that your point is: given finite resources by page authors do we want to ask them to put in the effort to make the default page accessible or focus their attention on the dynamically generated page. I've tried to echo what I've heard, albeit in a slightly different context, from users who are blind. At this point I'm going to defer to opinions from those users whom I'm sure we'll be hearing from directly. You also asked me to clarify the following: quote > "3. Even if dynamically generated pages are really equivalent, they can > "send the message" that so called "text-only" pages are needed... and > promote their use where they are hand written and subject to error." unquote I'm sorry I wasn't clear. Here's what I was trying to say. Lets suppose we have a site in which there are alternative optimally formatted pages. The user would opt into those pages in some way. Now suppose an average sighted user looks at them. The user will see what looks like what we call "text-only" pages. That could give the impression that accessibility is synonymous with such text-only pages. Now, we all know the problems of such pages when created by hand... they get out of date, may not be complete, link to inaccessible pages, etc. You are avoiding these problems by automatic generation. But that's a more subtle point. I'm concerned that the existance of such pages would lead the average web author to just go off and create the old fashioned text-only pages with all their attendant problems. If on the other hand, the default page is accessible, then you can easily avoid that problem, because the page on which the person selects the alternatate format could clearly say something like: quote Note: All default pages are accessible to people with disabilities per the w3c guildelines. However, the following options are available to make their use more efficient to people with disabilities. People without disabilities may also find some of these options attractive, especially if they are using older browsers or slow internet connections. unquote You can't say that if the default pages aren't accessible. I want to repeat that I think what you're doing to go beyond basic accessibility and maximize efficiency is extremely valuable and important. It could make the difference between a person being able to compete or not compete on equal terms with non-disabled colleagues. I just don't want to give up the option of conventional accessible pages in the process. Len ------- Leonard R. Kasday, Ph.D. Institute on Disabilities/UAP, and Department of Electrical Engineering Temple University 423 Ritter Annex, Philadelphia, PA 19122 kasday@acm.org (215) 204-2247 (voice) (800) 750-7428 (TTY)
Received on Tuesday, 16 November 1999 10:41:52 UTC