Re: Accessible _content_ management

This brings up a question of semantics -- does accessibility imply "usable by a person with a disability" or 
just that the "information is available to people with disabilties (or their user agents)"?

If you believe that accessiblity is simply making the information (content, structure) available for users, then 
the greater challenge is ensuring that the information is provided in such a way so that all users, including 
those with disabilities can easily understand and make use of the information.  For example, FrontPage 
might have every aspect of the application be designed so that the information in each dialog box and 
interface element is available.  If a user with a screen reader needed to access a part of the interface that 
allows him to insert a link into a web page, but it was very difficult to find (it worked fine once found), is the 
application less accessible, or less useable for that person?

In the end, I believe that we are all interested in the same end point, but I find it useful to have clarity on 
this point, particularly when talking with people not regularly involved with accessibility.  Does accessibility 
fall under usability or does it exist along side usability, but focused on people with disabilities?  I'm interested 
to hear what others think about this.

Thanks,
Andrew


6/29/2002 2:07:44 PM, kynn-eda@idyllmtn.com wrote:

>
>Jon wrote:
>> Thought for today:
>> Which is more accessible; Notepad or FrontPage?
>
>Accessible by _whom_?  That the question -- accessibility does not
>exist in a vacuum, it is a function involving human beings.
>
>--Kynn
>
>
Andrew

-- 
Andrew Kirkpatrick
CPB/WGBH National Center for Accessible Media
125 Western Ave.
Boston, MA  02134
E-mail: andrew_kirkpatrick@wgbh.org
Web site: ncam.wgbh.org

Received on Sunday, 30 June 2002 21:54:28 UTC