- From: Bryce Fields <bryce.fields@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 10:10:17 -0500
- To: "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
On 1/27/06, Stuart Smith <Stuart.M.Smith@manchester.ac.uk> wrote: > > > That is a very sad thing, that users have been reduced to this. I argue that an awareness of disability needs in the design process (a very different thing to an awareness of guidelines) is far more useful. Agreed. What most people don't realize is that creating a fully accessible web site (dare I say, a WCAG 1.0 Priority III "compliant" site), is a darned hard thing to do, especially if you don't consider the needs of all users in the planning and design stages. And it's usually at worst impossible and at best expensive to retrofit accessiblity into a poorly designed and constructed site. That's one reason I'm such a proponent of a full-blown accessibility statement over some meaningless icon. It implies and requires forethought, and is an indication that the needs of all users has gone into the planning of a site. And it's far more useful than an icon to the end user, because it clearly spells out what has been built into the site to accomodate their needs. -- Bryce Fields www.royalrodent.com "Do or do not! There is no try!" -- Yoda
Received on Friday, 27 January 2006 15:10:22 UTC