RE: Accessibility definition, was focus

    Text has to scale from a desktop to a mobile device for example.
    Otherwise it isn't accessible.

That is scope. I presumed a wrong scope.
  What other devices are in scope for this definition?


    > That leaves usability under a heading of total width, Universal 
    > Accessibility.
    
    Eh? I don't understand. 

From the diagram? That's the only two remaining domains.

    
    Usability + Accessibility = Universal Accessibility?

IMHO, universal accessibility is a vision, goal, or something
I'd  find hard to define without further scope. So I'll disagree
with that definition, rationale being that its unscoped.



    

    I would 
    like authors to write simple well XHTML web pages that can 
    be mangled by the user agent for the user's needs. I am 
    probably going back to the "write once for all" philosophy.

A part of the goal? It sells accessibility, but is very hard
for the range of published material, across the range of devices
and the range of disabilities.


    
    
    I hope you don't expect authors to cater for particular 
    devices.
I don't expect anything. You mention mobile devices above?

    Once again a author should write "accessible" 
    content, and rely on the device's user agent to cater for 
    alternative input and output.

I'd disagree with that. I think that dumps the burden on 
the user agent. Dear browser, please make this content accessible.
Its a shared responsibility, author, recipient with appropriate tools IMHO.
    
    > summary.
    > Who is your audience for this definition?
    
    Authors.
Of what content, class of content or at least something to clarify?
Map authors? 
Simple text authors? 
Wiring diagram authors?
  


    
    > What media are you addressing?
    
    The Web.

<grin/> And from the earlier comment re devices, what class of recipient
device?
PC? PDA? mobile phone? Other devices to come as business transactions move
webwards?


    
    Maybe I am trying to get at here that there should be 
    clearer distinction between authors and user agents responsibility.

And transport, and device capability, and recipient information user
understanding.


    
    I mean who has the disability? The user agent, the device, 
    the technology, the author or the user nowadays? :)

Going round in circles I guess, but which disability?
Is ignorance a disability? The author who simply states that
blind people can't get at web content, can they? Simply can't 
comprehend it. I've met such people. 


HTH ( a little :-)

regards DaveP

** snip here **





    

-- 
DISCLAIMER: 

NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments is 
confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended 
recipient you should not use, disclose, distribute or copy any of the 
content of it or of any attachment; you are requested to notify the 
sender immediately of your receipt of the email and then to delete it 
and any attachments from your system. 

RNIB endeavours to ensure that emails and any attachments generated by 
its staff are free from viruses or other contaminants. However, it 
cannot accept any responsibility for any  such which are transmitted.
We therefore recommend you scan all attachments. 

Please note that the statements and views expressed in this email and 
any attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily represent 
those of RNIB. 

RNIB Registered Charity Number: 226227 

Website: http://www.rnib.org.uk

Received on Thursday, 10 June 2004 06:20:54 UTC