- From: Access Systems <accessys@smart.net>
- Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 10:36:02 -0400 (EDT)
- To: "John Foliot - WATS.ca" <foliot@wats.ca>
- cc: "'Mike Brown'" <mike@signify.co.nz>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
On Tue, 14 Sep 2004, John Foliot - WATS.ca wrote: > Mike Brown wrote: > > Is the "reading age" of a site, assuming it can be measured, > > an accessibility issue? Is there a limit to how far > > information can be "simplified" before it loses its usefulness? of course it is > Readability is most certainly an access / accessibility issue. In the > > Cognitive issues can be as severe as Downs Syndrome or other severe > learning conditions (see Jonathan Chetwynd's Peepo site for ideas and > attempts to connect to this community - http://www.peepo.com/help.html > > However, as you suggest, the issue becomes one of providing appropriate > yet useful information targeted to the appropriate audience; "dumbing > down" the content below a certain level impacts on a site's usefulness > just as severely as a site that is too complex. Large web sites, I think this is where a site (especially a complex subject) needs to have several levels of detail, the "for more information" button can take a person to deeper and deeper levels of complexity. A site like the Diabetes site needs to have the basics, a how to live/control your D, just what is D, and maybe some life stories and a complex medical discussion, all can be in the form of "for more detail" click/tab etc whatever and every site probably should have the infamous "FAQ" tab/click > especially those with broad or mass appeal are always well advised to > employ an actual editor (of the human kind <grin>) to review content and > content language to ensure that the "message" is properly crafted to the > their readers. I don't think any automated checker has yet been devised that can adequately determine if a site is properly made, and unfortunately there are far too few folks avaliable who know how to comprehensively check a site about the best I can come up with (and maybe it is something this list should/could do) is a check list of items to check for...and even then I'm sure we would leave something out. I have seen very complex and graphic intensive sites that can't get a "Bobby" but are very usable. and conversely I've been to sites that have all sorts of access seals on them and they are unusable. not an easy answer Bob ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ CONFIGURE YOUR E-MAIL TO SEND TEXT ONLY, see http://expita.com/nomime.html +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve Neither liberty nor safety", Benjamin Franklin - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ASCII Ribbon Campaign accessBob NO HTML/PDF/RTF in e-mail accessys@smartnospam.net NO MSWord docs in e-mail Access Systems, engineers NO attachments in e-mail, *LINUX powered* access is a civil right *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# THIS message and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may be privileged. They are intended ONLY for the individual or entity named
Received on Tuesday, 14 September 2004 14:36:03 UTC