[thelist] Jakob Nielsen [was Anti-aliasing]

martin.p.burns at uk.pwcglobal.com martin.p.burns at uk.pwcglobal.com
Tue Feb 26 11:37:01 CST 2002


Memo from Martin P Burns of PricewaterhouseCoopers

-------------------- Start of message text --------------------



To:    thelist at lists.evolt.org
Subject:    RE: [thelist] Jakob Nielsen [was Anti-aliasing]


>> >= Is it necessary for ALL sites to be as usable and accessible as
>> possible?
>
>> Yes.
>
>> But - usable is in part defined as 'fit for task'. The Flash
>> game I cited earlier is usable for its task.

>So that makes it OK to use Flash? By this logic I could conceivably use
>Flash to build the entirety of my site, IF my objective was to create an
>experience for those who can use Flash and who don't mind attempting to
>become familiar with a new navigational concept.

If the purpose of your site is to present demonstration pieces to
show the capabilities of Flash, sure. Many personal sites are like that.

It's somewhat like the old guild system - as an apprentice or journeyman
you'd produce demonstration pieces with little practical application to
show your elders in the craft (NB *not* clients) whether you are capable
of the craft's skills.

>> If the very point of what
>> you're trying to do relies on a physical capability (ie it is not
>> conceivable
>> that it could be used without it), then it could be 'accessible' without
>> supporting
>> that physical ability.

>So accessibility is relative as well?

That's an inherent quality of user-centred design. Of course, very, very
few sites will have an audience which doesn't have representation of
users with disabilities, which is why I pointed out that while it's
theoretically
possible, it's only going to happen in a tiny number of sites.

>= Is it necessary for all sites to meet a standard level of usability AND
>accessibility? And if not, why not? If so, why so?
Not all, but so many that the number will be almost indistinguishable
from 'all'. WAI recommendations should be the default, and to deviate
needs a case-by-case justification.

Cheers
Martin


--------------------- End of message text --------------------

This e-mail is sent by the above named in their
individual, non-business capacity and is not on
behalf of PricewaterhouseCoopers.

PricewaterhouseCoopers may monitor outgoing and incoming
e-mails and other telecommunications on its e-mail and
telecommunications systems.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
material.  Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or
taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or
entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.   If you received
this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any
computer.




More information about the thelist mailing list