priority wording

Hi

I've been looking for general support for Accessibility & there's more
excuses than I expected: See (& note GDrake's not my problem attitude)
http://browserwatch.internet.com/cgi-bin/Ultimate.cgi?action=threadlist&foru
m=BrowserWatch+Chat&number=1&topic=000310-000000-120798-000011.msg&DaysPrune=80
Which brings me to the wording of the Priorities it will likely all sound
better by letting developers know they're ensuring all people can use the
Web while not decreasing the Priorities' value to consumers. I didn't use
the term user as I detest it, frankly I connect it to drug u... or a herd of
mindless sheep. People buy software (whether or not it relates to
Accessibility) so I like to subtlety remind software writers of that by not
referring to faceless users. In the Guildlines' Introduction & Priorities
talking about people will personalize this effort. Next is a reworded
Priority 1 to illustrate the concept to garner Group reaction. (The rest
will take a little time as my typing somewhat resembles the challenge of
'Assembling The International Space Station' in a space suit
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap981210.html )

"Only use of this <b>essential technique</b> by user agents as a native
feature or through compatibility with assistive technology <b>ensures that
people</b> with certain disabilities will be able to access all information.
This technique is a necessity for some individuals to be able to use the Web."

The word 'must' is removed as people tend to bristle at being told what to
do. 2 phrases, essential technique & ensures that people, are in bold face
to emphasize importance & accomplishment. Also gone is the word 'impossible'
since it doesn't relate to the Web's nature!

Regards,
Bryan

-> "I don't need to stand to talk, to advise, & to generally make a pain in
the ass out of myself." Dr. Stephen Franklin, "Babylon 5": 'Shadow Dancing'

Received on Thursday, 10 December 1998 11:06:40 UTC