Re: approval

Dear Friends, especially Jim, Carla, Jonathan, Bob, and David H P  -

I agree with almost everything said; it is terribly complicated and hard to 
satisfy  everybody's needs.  We lack data on which to set priorities.

W3C and WAI have disappointed me for addressing only one side of the 
problem.  They have not established (at least I have been unable to find it) 
a detailed list of disabilities and the fixes and accommodations for each 
and where these are found (or not) in the guidelines.
It hurts me that the specific fixes and accommodations I need seem not to be 
mentioned.   Until W3C and WAI looks at accessibility from the disabilities 
end they will continue to disappoint.

David H P spoke of outreach beyond the internet.  It should of course be 
done and we as a population should do it, but not we as W3C and WAI. 
Shoemaker, stick to your last.

As to what to do first, where to make efforts, I think establishing a 
disabilities list (as mentioned above) would help to point the way.   I have 
collected a lot about my particular problems in "Accessibility for Eye 
Readers", 12k and growing, available as an email attachment from 
gfmueden@verizon.net   Comments welcome.
It needs a companion piece for Ear Readers.
Who will bell the cat?

Enough. It is an hour past my eye drops and my lunch.

George  ===gm===








----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Carla De Winter" <carla@accesscapable.com>
To: <accessys@smart.net>; <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 11:46 AM
Subject: RE: approval


|
| Agreed, in our team there was a born blind, and someone who is officially
| blind but still has a remainder of sight.
| The learning curve is different, the born blind woman is so used to high
| speed text-to-speech, that we hardly could follow her:) And she has an
| incredible "visual" memory, as hobby she plays in 3D worlds with a 
text-only
| client.
|
| Maybe it's equivalent to the difference in learning curve between kids and
| adults.
|
| Carla
|
|
|
| -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
| Van: accessys@smart.net [mailto:accessys@smart.net]
| Verzonden: woensdag 22 februari 2012 15:29
| Aan: Cain, Sally
| CC: G F Mueden; Marc Haunschild; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
| Onderwerp: RE: approval
|
|
| also I think there is a big difference based on when they became blind.
| those born blind think and functiion differently than those who became
| blind later in life.  and I guess that "later" in life is a very loose
| sliding scale.  sometimes the later one becomes blind the harder it is to
| use adaptive equipment (nothing is absolute)
|
| Bob
|
| On Wed, 22 Feb 2012, Cain, Sally wrote:
|
| > Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 13:23:51 -0000
| > From: "Cain, Sally" <sally.cain@rnib.org.uk>
| > To: G F Mueden <gfmueden@verizon.net>, Marc Haunschild <mh@zadi.de>,
| >     w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
| > Subject: RE: approval
| > Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 13:24:52 +0000
| > Resent-From: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
| >
| > Dear George,
| >
| > I would just like to comment on your statement "all the blind are
| > equally blind". I think it is important to note that this is not the
| > case. Someone who considers themselves blind may have light perception.
| > They may also have a tiny amount of vision, even if it may not be very
| > useful. I think it is important to recognise that every single persons
| > vision is different, even those people who have the same eye condition,
| > so we can make no assumptions about what someone can or cannot see.
| >
| > I hope this is helpful.
| >
| > Thanks
| > Sally
| > Digital Accessibility Development Officer
| > Royal National Institute for Blind People (RNIB)
| >
| >
| > -----Original Message-----
| > From: G F Mueden [mailto:gfmueden@verizon.net]
| > Sent: 22 February 2012 12:56
| > To: Marc Haunschild; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
| > Subject: Re: approval
| >
| > Marc, please amend your category list  to point out the vast difference
| > between those who don't see and those who don't see well; their needs
| > are
| > quite different and what helps one group is often of no help to the
| > other.
| > Further, while all the blind are equally blind, there is variety in the
| > needs of those who still read with their eyes but not well.
| > Typically they suffer from (1) poor acuity (sharpness of focus) and (2)
| > poor
| > contrast sensitivity (ability to distinguish between shades of colors or
| >
| > grays).  A third difficulty is small field size, not so prevalent but
| > important.
| >
| > The fix for #! is generally only half known.  Everybody knows about
| > magnification.  The other part is the need for word wrap to keep copy on
| > the
| > screen.   Without it every line must be chased to its end, scrolling
| > right
| > and then left for the start of the next line.
| > The fix for #2 is not magnification (often suggested), but is choice of
| > font
| > for incoming text.  Poor contrast sensitivity calls for thicker strokes
| > in
| > the lines that make the characters, so the use of bold fonts is the fix.
| >
| > User's software can provide them, but formatting can prevent their use.
| > Magnification help only a little.  A bigger faint character is still
| > faint.
| >
| > Enough.  To learn more, "Accessibility for Eye Readers". 12k and
| > growing, is
| > available as an email attachment from gfmueden@verizon.net
| > Commentts welcome.
| >
| > George   ===gm===
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| > .
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| > ----- Original Message -----
| > From: "Marc Haunschild" <mh@zadi.de>
| > To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
| > Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 1:06 AM
| > Subject: Re: approval
| >
| >
| > | Hi Meliha,
| > |
| > | Simple question, simple answer. There are four categories of problems,
| > | people might have using a website
| > |
| > | vision
| > | hearing
| > | movement
| > | cognition
| > |
| > | can be less than average or (partially) non-existent (like the ability
| > | to see colors or to see with just one eye).
| > |
| > | Some things, which can be a challenge in real life, do not influence
| > the
| > | usage of a website a lot: like sitting in a wheel chair.
| > |
| > | I think this is clear. So just try to understand what needs have
| > people
| > | which cannot see. Can they use your site? How? It is quite easy to
| > | support them: they use screenreaders, programs that read your content.
| > | You have to provide ALL the content as text (also what is on your
| > | pictures). Now disable your css and look at your pages: everything
| > | should be linearly ordered in just one dimension: from top to bottom.
| > | Make sure, that the content is provided in the correct order: does it
| > | still make sense? Or do you use phrases like:  on the left you see...
| > -
| > | which is nonsense now, because there is no left or right ;-)
| > |
| > | Try this with other disabilties. What is a problem for people that
| > | cannot move very good: if they cannot put there arms way up in the
| > air,
| > | its propably no problem to use a mouse and keyboard, but if they have
| > a
| > | tremor, its very difficult for them to klick on tiny buttons and
| > icons.
| > |
| > | With this approach you can find out a lot about your own site. If you
| > | like exoeriments: Just try to use your page with your feet instead of
| > | hands, wear glasses for watching 3d-movies (these with green and red
| > | "glass")
| > |
| > | And further just use your imagination.
| > |
| > | One thing which is difficult to understand: people whonever were able
| > to
| > | hear, normally do not speak even the language of there own country.
| > They
| > | use gestures for communication. So they cannot read your texts - at
| > | least only with big difficulties. So try to keep your sentences short,
| > | remain essentially, just write, like everybody should write anyway:
| > | there are a lot of descriptions/tutorials out there in the web, How to
| > | write texts.
| > |
| > | You will see - all of this improvements will help everybody to use
| > your
| > | site - like already saif here: accessibility ist usability for
| > everybody.
| > |
| > | Good luck with your site!
| > |
| > | Am 20.02.2012 10:59, schrieb Meliha Yenilmez:
| > | > Hi Everone,
| > | >
| > | > I have two questions.
| > | >
| > | > First one, I want to learn our web site is accessible or not? How
| > can
| > | > our web site approval for accessbile or no?
| > | >
| > | > And second one, if our web page/pages is accessible,  who can give
| > | > conformance logo/s?
| > | >
| > | > Thanks for all,
| > | >
| > | > *Meliha Yenilmez*
| > |
| > | Marc
| > |
| >
| >
| >
| >
| > To report this e-mail as Spam, please forward it to:
| > spam@mailcontrol.com
| >
| >
| > --
| > February is Service Matters month! We're showcasing travel, shopping and
| money providers that are giving blind and partially sighted people great
| customer service. We're also launching our new 'Guide to getting great
| service'. Find out more at www.rnib.org.uk/servicematters
| > --
| >
| > 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
| >
| >
| >
| > This message has been scanned for viruses by Websense Hosted Security -
| > http://www.websense.com/content/HostedEmailSecurity.aspx
| >
| >
| >
|

Received on Wednesday, 22 February 2012 18:08:03 UTC