W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > October to December 2010

Re: ACTION 475 - Benefits Accessibility

From: Simon Harper <simon.harper@manchester.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2010 09:24:27 +0000
Message-ID: <4D00A04B.3080604@manchester.ac.uk>
To: Greg Lowney <gcl-0039@access-research.org>
CC: UAWG list <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
Hi Greg,
You are right on this but I can't see how we can define something so 
malleable. If we make a fixed definition we will miss lots of stuff. The 
definition is made in the context of documentation - I think that 
'benefits accessibility' can be interpreted by the documenter, that they 
document anything that was built to fulfil accessibility guidelines and 
any other features they may think helps accessibility with even if this 
was not their original intention.

However, I'm happy for more lawyer-like people to change this.

Cheers
Si.

=======================

Simon Harper
University of Manchester (UK)

More: http://simon.harper.name/about/card/


On 09/12/2010 07:01, Greg Lowney wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> This is not bad if the goal is to provide a /concept/ suitable for 
> guidelines, but it doesn't seem to be attempting to provide a 
> /definition/ suitable for a standard, meaning something one could use 
> to determine whether a product complies with a success criteria that 
> applies to "features that benefit accessibility".
>
> I love the quote from Mike Brown that "concepts are for scientists and 
> definitions are for lawyers". Unfortunately, standards often have to 
> be written in a lawyerly fashion if you want them to be enforced 
> consistently. Do we want to go for something general, or something 
> objectively measurable?
>
>     Thanks,
>     Greg
>
> -------- Original Message  --------
> Subject: ACTION 475 - Benefits Accessibility
> From: Simon Harper <simon.harper@manchester.ac.uk>
> To: UAWG list <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
> Date: 12/7/2010 3:06 AM
>> Hi there,
>>
>> I was assigned ACTION-475 'Create definition of 'benefit 
>> accessibility' or reword all SC in GL 3.3'
>>
>> So this is what I've come up with.
>>
>> "Features which benefit accessibility fall into two groups: (1) those 
>> features which have been explicitly created to aid accessibility, 
>> possibly in an attempt to follow guidelines such as these; or (2) 
>> those which assist accessibility but emerge from other functionality 
>> not originally created for accessibility purposes. Further, these 
>> accessibility benefits may be explicit such as the ability to control 
>> the User Agent from the keyboard; or implicit such as the ability to 
>> style a page based on a user supplied style sheet."
>>
>> Cheers
>> Si.
>>
>> =======================
>>
>> Simon Harper
>> University of Manchester (UK)
>>
>> More: http://simon.harper.name/about/card/
>>
>
Received on Thursday, 9 December 2010 09:25:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:39 UTC