Comments on: 100,000 reasons to design for accessibility http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2005/100000-reasons/ Tue, 07 Feb 2012 15:32:57 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: ffxiv gil http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2005/100000-reasons/comment-page-1/#comment-661537 ffxiv gil Mon, 08 Mar 2010 16:26:14 +0000 http://wp.brucelawson.co.uk/2005/100000-reasons-to-design-for-accessibility/#comment-661537 I usually don’t post in Blogs but your blog forced me to, amazing work.. beautiful ?

]]> By: Scott Hand http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2005/100000-reasons/comment-page-1/#comment-2 Scott Hand Sat, 23 Apr 2005 09:10:25 +0000 http://wp.brucelawson.co.uk/2005/100000-reasons-to-design-for-accessibility/#comment-2 I agree with most of your article on web standards and accessibility. As an architect, I deal with in the realm of accessibility all of the time. Not only are there laws and court cases that enforce full accessibility in all public buildings, but there is a permitting process we have to go through which (as well as determining the building will be safe to occupy) determines that the building is fully accessibile to all occupants. The big step I see why the internet will not have enforcable accessibility standards is this lack of permitting. It's never going to happen because the rate of site creation is far beyond any governing body's ability to monitor. Also, I wouldn't want this forced standard. Yes, for a large company, they should WANT to have their corporate site meet every possible compliance. But, in the same way that a lot of architecture is hindered by the need to meet a book full of regulations, the simple creative elegance offered to web designers would be lost. Of course, right now, the big thing for web designers is to design something great that also fits into these standards, but eventually that may fade. Buildings are public spaces that occupy time and place. They should have accessibility guidelines so that everyone can experience them. The internet is a media. If standards were enforced there, then all media should be accessible to everyone. (All magazines, newspapers, movies, and CDs should come with braille and closed captioning.) Just my thoughts. Great site though! I agree with most of your article on web standards and accessibility. As an architect, I deal with in the realm of accessibility all of the time. Not only are there laws and court cases that enforce full accessibility in all
public buildings, but there is a permitting process we have to go through which (as well as determining the building will be safe to occupy) determines that the building is fully accessibile to all occupants.

The big step I see why the internet will not have enforcable accessibility standards is this lack of permitting. It’s never going to happen because the rate of site creation is far beyond any governing body’s ability to
monitor.

Also, I wouldn’t want this forced standard. Yes, for a large company, they should WANT to have their corporate site meet every possible compliance. But, in the same way that a lot of architecture is hindered by the need to meet a book full of regulations, the simple creative elegance offered to web designers would be lost. Of course, right now, the big thing for web designers is to design something great that also fits into these standards, but eventually that may fade. Buildings are public spaces that occupy time and place. They should have accessibility guidelines so that everyone can experience them. The internet is a media. If standards were enforced there, then all media should be accessible to everyone. (All magazines, newspapers, movies, and CDs should come with braille and closed captioning.)

Just my thoughts.
Great site though!

]]>