- From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@crosslink.net>
- Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 13:50:24 -0800
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
William, Reading yours and Len's advice on testability, I have a concern. Kynn recently pointed out that the checkpoints that address using illustrations to enhance understanding wouldn't be testable, as to whether they are illustrations or some other graphic. If the guidelines go in the direction of testable "accessibility', it may miss whole areas of "accessibility" which aren't machine testable. It could take the needs of those folks with disabilities that don't test well out of the loop. Anne At 10:25 AM 12/22/00 -0800, William Loughborough wrote: >At 10:04 AM 12/22/00 -0800, Kynn Bartlett wrote: >>just to make a web accessibility evaluator's job easier. > >It's because the "accessibility evaluator" is not a distinct person from >the "user". One aspect of using the Web is to be able to tell if a portion >thereof is going to be accessible. One could use a tool to determine this >if the testability information were included. > >It's a P2 simply because its absence makes "...difficult for people with >disabilities to access the web" in the above sense. One thing about the Web >(as distinct from particular Web chunks) that matters is being able to >determine if a site will work for your circumstances. This can only be >determined by an agent of yours if it's testable.. > >-- >Love. > ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE > > Anne L. Pemberton http://www.pen.k12.va.us/Pav/Academy1 http://www.erols.com/stevepem/Homeschooling apembert@crosslink.net Enabling Support Foundation http://www.enabling.org
Received on Friday, 22 December 2000 13:54:27 UTC