WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

RE: What is Web Accessibility? From the W3C

for

From: Austin, Darrel
Date: Mar 24, 2006 10:20AM

> As a person with a disability, I can probably be considered
> as hardly objective but I must admit that I always find it
> disturbing when something we have worked so hard for and so
> long for being appropriated by others in this way and our
> rights being conditional to what is convenient for "stroller-pushers".

Catherine:

Good post. I don't disagree with most of it (though we could quibble on
the definition of somewhat subjective quasi-synonymous terms).

The only thing to comment on is that last sentence of yours. Kynn
brought it up as a response to my comment, and, though I've tried to
clarify it, I guess I've failed.

I want to emphasize that in no way does talking about accessibility as
more of a universal access concept (as you describe) make the issue
conditional for only one group (or, at least, is shouldn't). My point
that I've tried to communicate is that accessibility isn't or, at least,
shouldn't be about including one group at the exclusion of the other.
It's not JUST about strollers, and nor is is just about wheelchairs.
There's nothing to be gained by excluding either of those groups.

The argument that a building should have a way to enter the front door
without using the stairs because of a social responsibility to
accommodate those in wheelchairs is fine.

The argument that a building should have a way to enter the front door
without using the stairs because it benefits the stroller pushers is
fine.

Ideally, one wanting to spread the ideals of accessibility/universal
access would bring up both benefits in the same conversation.

All IMHO, of course...

-Darrel