Thread Subject: Re: Cognitive Proposals
This archival content is maintained by WebAIM and NCDAE on behalf of TEITAC and the U.S. Access Board . Additional details on the updates to section 508 and section 255 can be found at the Access Board web site.
From: William Loughborough
Date: Wed, Apr 11 2007 8:20 AM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: Peter Korn: "Re: Cognitive Proposals"
- Previous message in thread: David Poehlman: "Re: Cognitive Proposals"
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
Andi Snow-Weaver wrote:
> Jamie made the last set of recommendations around addressing cognitive
I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out that a big part of our
difficulty with getting down to it with "cognitive disabilities" is that
most of us are clueless as to just what-all that encompasses.
We don't seem to have very many professionals on board who deal with
this on a daily basis and I haven't encountered many people in WGs/lists
who qualify as members of the class of those having "cognitive
disabilities" - except myself (although I prefer to think of mine as
Ageing Disability) and Lisa Seeman of W3C/WAI's Protocols & Formats WG
(she's dyslexic and brilliant).
There are so many diagnoses that put one into a "cognitive disability"
box that I think we need more grounding in the field. Unless/until we
have some better basis for dealing with recommendations we will not get
much useful done. Any requirements for one "branch" of "cognitive" may
not apply to other branches, might even be "harmful" for accessibility.