- From: Ryan Jean <ryanj@disnetwork.org>
- Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 08:34:50 -0400
- To: "'David Woolley'" <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>, "'wai-ig list'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
I agree with you here. It's all about the money to companies, when it should be about making sure everyone has access to the same information. Sincerely, Ryan Jean Assistant IT Specialist The Disability Network Flint, MI -----Original Message----- From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of David Woolley Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 5:15 PM To: 'wai-ig list' Subject: Re: Commands and Accessibility Ryan Jean wrote: > Is it just me or does it seem like DOS was a lot more accessible to users > than Windows? Is it a fair statement to say command-line operating systems > (DOS, Unix, and Apple) are more accessible than their graphic user interface > counterparts (Windows, Linux, and Macintosh)? Except where the disability is in an inability to use written languages, that sort of interface is much more easy to make accessible for written documents and simple forms. Graphical ones are better for non-verbal users, and where one wants to provide a lot of command options for infrequent users. However, when presented with a graphical medium, designers tend to take out their artistic licence, with the result that graphical interfaces are often only really usable by someone with vast experience of deciphering user interface metaphors. That also makes it difficult for a machine to understand the page and provide alternative forms. Standards like ARIA try to get round this, but I can't imagine it will be much used in the cases that really need it. Frequent users are most productive with command line, or character cell interfaces. I don't know if it still happens, but the travel agents used to do all their Sabre bookings on such an interface, even though they might have run it in a Window. GUIs are easy to sell to senior management, who are not heavy users of the software, and to the general public, who don't know better. There may, however, be a morale raising effect in thinking you are using the latest technology, and, in fact, a lot of GUI software over the last decade has probably been sold solely on that basis. -- David Woolley Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want. RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam, that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.
Received on Wednesday, 20 August 2008 12:37:07 UTC