WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: accessible version of website


From: chagnon@pubcom.com
Date: Apr 28, 2020 2:03PM

Reaffirming everything Peter said below about "separate but equal." It's not ethical and it doesn't work.

From the practical viewpoint, why in the world would you want to keep the content up to date in two websites, rather than in just one?

Who wants to double their workload? And quadruple their chances of failing?

— — —
Bevi Chagnon, founder/CEO | <EMAIL REMOVED>
— — —
PubCom: Technologists for Accessible Design + Publishing
consulting ' training ' development ' design ' sec. 508 services
Upcoming classes at www.PubCom.com/classes
— — —
Latest blog-newsletter – Accessibility Tips at www.PubCom.com/blog

-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum < <EMAIL REMOVED> > On Behalf Of Peter Shikli
Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2020 3:39 PM
To: WebAIM Forum < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] accessible version of website

Back when I was young a hundred years ago, it was called "separate but equal" and related to race-based education. Rather soundly discredited because it turned out not to end up very equal. This is why I would join my colleagues skeptical of the whole idea of accessible versions. We need to include the disabled rather than give them some diluted content to keep them from bothering us.

We can give the disabled a tabular view of a chart, for example, only to find that sighted visitors like that too. I can say the same about a longdesc I encountered once, which clarified things for me as a sighted user. Key is that we may give the disabled some additional resources, but let's avoid different versions.

Peter Shikli
Access2online Inc.
Prison inmates helping the internet become accessible