Dear Nick,
I agree. The current emphasis on ticking the boxes, whilst clearly important
at one level to ensure that as few people as possible are physically
excluded from sites, can mask a much more fundamental problem: many
websites, including some that achieve WAI compliance, are inaccessible for a
variety of reasons, including reading age level and a failure to engage
users quickly enough.
Like you, I would welcome further discussion of these issues.
Martin
Chair elearning group for museums, libraries and archives
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/ELEARNING.html
---
Martin Bazley
Internet Projects Manager, Learning Unit
Science Museum, Exhibition Road, London SW7 2DD
Tel: 020 7942 4766 Fax: 020 7942 4712
-----Original Message-----
From: Nick Poole [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 27 January 2003 15:04
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Web sites of potential interest - access assessment
Dear All,
I just wanted to respond to the latest postings on the list about approved
sites and accessibility. While I agree with the basic point that many sites
in our sector fall short of meeting Web Accessibility Initiative validation,
I think it is important that we maintain a sense of perspective on this. WAI
compliance does not mean accessibility - it means WAI compliance. As the
impending release of the new guidelines aptly demonstrates, this in itself
is a movable feast and cannot be applied unilaterally when evaluating the
accessibility of a given site.
I have yet to see a website which does not fail one of the automatic
validation tools in at least one respect, and I am concerned that this is
engendering a negative culture around the issue as a whole. The fact is that
a large number of people have put a tremendous amount of effort into
improving the accessibility of their sites, and highlighting the individual
tags which fail to meet specifications does little to encourage them to
continue their efforts. Validation, and the tendency of automatic tools to
highlight very detailed technical points, were only ever intended to assist
the developer in designing a better page. They do not by any means guarantee
the accessibility or otherwise of that page.
On the subject of Flash, while I agree that there are specific issues
surrounding the use of a proprietary embedded format (particularly where
used to deliver navigation elements), there are equally issues around the
fact that it enables even those of us with limited technical skills to
deliver the kind of interactivity which the majority of our users expect. I
am not arguing the case for the accessibility of Flash here, merely
highlighting the point that it is by no means as simple as 'Flash is bad'. I
would particularly like to highlight the cases in which Flash interactivity
has rendered previously inaccessible content accessible to a whole range of
users by virtue of the very interactivity which gives such cause for
concern. It strikes me that far more evil is done in the implementation of
Flash than is implicit in the format itself.
At the risk of opening the debate up still further - is there anyone else
who thinks that too much of the accessibility debate thus far has centred
around visual impairment? While I recognise that a web page is primarily a
visual medium, it's main role is still to convey information. There is very
little in the currently available standards (NOF or otherwise) about making
content intellectually accessible to different audiences, about meeting the
needs of the elderly, or those with learning difficulties, or those for whom
english is not a first language. I would be interested to hear how people
have approached these issues!
Best regards,
Nick
Nick Poole
ICT Adviser
Resource: The Council for Museums, Archives and Libraries
16 Queen Anne's Gate
London
SW1H 9AA
Tel 020 7273 1410
New! Visit the Cornucopia database of UK museum collections at
http://www.cornucopia.org.uk
Visit the Resource website at http://www.resource.gov.uk
Visit the Peoples Network website at http://www.peoplesnetwork.gov.uk
Join the Resourcenews email list at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk
Join the Cultural Diversity email list at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gray, Peter [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 2:32 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Web sites of potential interest - access assessment
>
> > Also websites that use Flash are inaccessible to many users.
> > I know that
> > Macromedia are looking at the whole issue of accessibility but at the
> > moment Flash scores low on the accessibility front.
> >
> > Colin Hynson
> >
>
> Which is why you should only use Flash for additional functions that can't
be delivered any other way, not for basic functionality, and certainly not
for entire sites.>
>
> Flash MX claims to be accessible, it's just that there's only one screen
reader (which of course you have to pay for) which currently supports it.
>
<http://www.macromedia.com/macromedia/accessibility/features/flash/faq.html>
>
> Best wishes
>
> Pete
> --
> Peter M Gray
> Museums Officer
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan
> service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working
> around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com
> ________________________________________________________________________
The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments is
confidential. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its
status. It is intended solely for the addressee. Any unauthorised use is
strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please notify
the sender immediately and delete the email and any attachments from the
system.
********************************************************************
This e-mail and attachments are intended for the named
addressee only and are confidential. If you have received
this e-mail in error please notify the sender immediately,
delete the message from your computer system and
destroy any copies. Any views expressed in this message
are those of the individual sender and may not reflect the
views of the National Museum of Science & Industry.
The NMSI website can be found at http://www.nmsi.ac.uk
*********************************************************************
|