- From: Sandra Vassallo <S.Vassallo@e-bility.com>
- Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2003 10:25:53 +1000
- To: "'w3c-wai-ig@w3.org'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030726095531.02271748@e-bility.com>
At 10:13 AM 25/07/2003 +0100, you wrote: >I am doing some work for a large UK company that sells a range of >'accessible' products alongside its standard product range. They are >currently under the category of 'accessible products' - BUT in user testing >when looking for accessible products NOBODY look in this category! >'Accessible' is a great word for people in the industry, but currently it >doesn't mean a great deal to anyone else. > >Can anyone suggest another term? We tried 'special needs' but the client >isn't happy with that because the phrase has negative connotations in the >UK. Hi, I like the idea of including the items in the most appropriate mainstream category (by product description) eg: * phones (xyz brand big button phone), * hardware (abc brand amplifier or visual alert signals) * emulators eg TTY Maybe the quick search categories could also include an accessible design options, but my experience is that most people would start looking by product description rather than a discrete category that is seperate to other 'standard' products. People with disabilities also benefit from features such as cordless phones, handsfree/speaker phones and mobile phones (illuminated displays, vibration call alert, voice dial etc) - would these be classified as accessible or standard? Cheers, Sandra. ... e-bility Pty Ltd - Inclusive IT Web Accessibility & Usability Solutions tel: (02) 9810 2216 mob: 0414 765 881 email: S.Vassallo@e-bility.com e-bility web: http://www.e-bility.com Inclusive IT: http://www.inclusiveit.com.au/
Received on Friday, 25 July 2003 20:25:54 UTC