Re: Research on Accessibility

I was willing to let go of this thread (including NOT writing another email
to acknowledge my substitution of "sell" for "sale," anal retentive that I
am <grin>), except for these last remarks of Kynn Bartlett's.

>Point of order -- I'm not championing _you_ or your cause.  I
>"champion" justice.  It's unjust for a certain class of people
>to be unable to access the net; so I work to make a net where
>everyone has equal access.  But I'm not doing it "for the poor
>blind people" (that's sarcastic quotes; I don't go around
>pitying folks or whatever), I'm doing it because I Do What Is
>Right.

SD::
As I said to you privately, whatever the paths we take -- and they ARE
different paths -- I, too, believe the destination is ultimately the same,
to-wit: getting the Web to a point where disabled people can use it as
easily as non-disabled people. Making this into some kind of moral endeavor
or a debate about who is "more right," whose motivation more "objective,"
is inviting even more obstacles to achieving that goal. 

If, as a disabled person, I can speak up on something which may not have
occurred to a non-disabled person, or just add another perspective to the
common trough, then I will do so. I am not here SOLELY as a disabled
person, though. I learn just as much from the discussions about whether or
not to include a FOR attribute in a LABEL tag as I do when the discussions
veer off into the philosophical or social spheres. When I have something to
contribute to a discussion about attributes (for example), I will also
speak up then.

Seems to me everyone gets to be his/her OWN champion that way. 

Hoping this is my last word on this thread (and figuring a lot of other
people are hoping the same thing <laugh>),

Ree' Dolloff

Received on Sunday, 19 April 1998 01:46:21 UTC