Comments on: Cost-Effectiveness of Accessibility

By: Martin Kliehm

Martin Kliehm — Mon, 30 Jul 2007 10:43:31 +0000

Now speech recognition will be built into Fords too, as a joint venture with Microsoft. It’s a common trend, not just an expensive toy for the rich. And it will come out of Cologne, if that does comfort you as a local patriot.

By: Martin Kliehm

Martin Kliehm — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 14:45:54 +0000

Tomas, I understand your point from a moral standpoint. Alas clients do not ask me how much karma they earn by keeping a website accessible. They ask how much it costs and who will benefit from it. I do not intend to confuse the concepts of accessibility and device independence, but when a website is accessible, I'm halfway done for mobile access, too.

Would you say access for people with disabilities is more important than mobile access? How about countries where most people do not have desktop access? Should a website exclude people with poor reading abilities just because that doesn't count as a handicap? How discriminating and chauvinistic is that?

So instead of stressing the differences, I rather look for related or common elements, the big picture. I think that's how progress can be made.

By: /T

/T — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 14:19:50 +0000

First of all: “Thou shalt not surf the web while on the Autobahn”

Next, you are again confusing the concepts of universality (rest assured, there is no such thing) and interoperability with the needs of disabled users. This may be machine-readable code (well, what isn't?), but you're not saying that every accessible website should look just like that, aren't you?

Call it availability or whatever, but please do not call the needs of a 7 series BMW an accessibility issue. Accessibility is about people with disabilities, not about fancy machines and expensive toys.

By: Martin Kliehm

Martin Kliehm — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 10:51:48 +0000

Tomas pointed out that in L&G’s calculation 9 million British with disabilities out of a population of 60 million is slightly exaggerated. I agree, that’s why I searched for numbers of severely disabled within the working age population. In Germany those are about 3 million out of 82 million, that’s more reasonable.

Also I didn’t want to imply that all older users need enlarged text, but rather the option to enlarge text.

Of course leaving school before secondary level is no disability, but you can’t deny that some of them would benefit from simple language. And the technical requirements are similar, no matter if JAWS or your 7 series BMW reads web pages.

By: Martin Kliehm

Martin Kliehm — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 10:15:28 +0000

And I couldn’t disagree more.

“Technical” as in “machine readable code,” not like a similar user interface.

By: /T

/T — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 10:08:24 +0000

… but you canâ€™t deny that some of them would benefit from simple language …

The difference being that they can in fact change their condition whereas PwDs canâ€™t.

And the technical requirements are similar, no matter if JAWS or your 7 series BMW reads web pages.

And I couldnâ€™t disagree more.

By: /T

/T — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 09:18:58 +0000

SchÃ¶n. Aber:

Das Problem ist nur dass die Zahlen aus England, vorsichtig ausgedrÃ¼ckt, frisiert sind. Die internen Hochrechnungen von L&G als solche mÃ¶gen ja stimmen, aber sie basieren meines Wissens nach auf Zahlen der britischen Disability Rights Commission. Dort hat man kurzerhand die Zahlen aufgehÃ¼bscht, indem 7 Millionen potentielle Nutzer, die keine schweren GegenstÃ¤nde heben kÃ¶nnen (Maus?) und 1,6 Millionen Nutzer mit Inkontinenz (Session Timeout beim Pullern?) hinzugerechnet wurden. Wenn man solche LÃ¤cherlichkeiten rausrechnet, dann sehen die Zahlen nicht mehr ganz so gut aus.

… 50+: 31,8 Mio. (39%), Tendenz steigend - Schrift vergrÃ¶ÃŸern…

Das alte MÃ¤rchen, dass alle Sehbehinderten und alle Ã¤lteren Nutzer stark vergrÃ¶ÃŸerte Schrift. brauchen. Skalierbare Schrift ok, aber generell grÃ¶ÃŸere Schrift ist falsch (->Altersweitsichtigkeit, Retinopathia pigmentosa, etc.)

… PISA 2003 unterste Kompetenzstufe Lesen oder darunter: 22,3% …

Was ist denn unter der untersten Kompetenzstufe? Negative Werte?

… SchulabgÃ¤nger 2005 ohne mittlere Reife: 33% …

Ein HauptschulabschluÃŸ (Folie 5) ist keine Behinderung im Sinne des Bundesbehindertengleichstellungsgesetztes. Gleiches gilt fÃ¼r den Erwerb eines 7er BMW (Folie 6).