One thought that I've been spinning out lately really points out the irony of this discussion. I've been thinking about the debt that Web 2.0 technologies (really, the web itself) owe to people with disabilities and how the general success of Web 2.0 validates a Universal Design approach. Here are the bread crumbs:
many web 2.0 technologies employ xml >> xml evolved from sgml >> one Charles Goldfarb's main motivations for developing sgml was to make books more accessible to people with visual disabilities. a little more about this (very little, unfortunately) can be found in this Goldfarb bio: http://www.sgmlsource.com/press/CGbioFull.htm Since I'm a big fan of both XML and Universal Design, I've found this natural correspondence between markup language and accessibility interesting for awhile now... On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 3:10 AM, Claude Almansi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi All > > About universal design: an interesting collaboration between advocates > of universal design for both real-life and online accessibility has > started in Italy in the last week, around Santiago Calatrava's bridge > shortly to be opened in Venice (1). The associations of people with > disabilities had been protesting against the inaccessibility for > people in wheelchairs and for low-sighted people of the project since > 2003. In May 2008, Caltrava himself issued a press release (2) > putting the responsibility for the inaccessibility on the Commune of > Venice's adaptation of his project. > > Then Roberto Scano, acomputer accessibility specialist, took up the > issue in his blog (3) about a week ago because the mayor of Venice > wanted to have the bridge inaugurated in the presence of the > President of the Italian republic on Sept. 18, and the traditional > media took it up: such a solemn inauguration of something that > violates the Italian constitution and accessibility laws is a bad > idea. Then the right hon. Cacciari gave in about the inauguration, but > fueled the discussion further by accusing the disabled people's > associations of "harming" the city by their objections. > > Now such a collaboration is not as obvious as might seem, because of > the different needs of people with different disabilities, and because > of the different technologies involved in online and real-life > accessibility (4). But as Roberto Ellero pointed out in "Venezia, > ponte di Calatrava, il ponte che divide" (5), the common denominator > is universal design: > > "some analogies can be seen, if you have been dealing with these > issues for some years, be it on the Web or in the physical world: > there are analogies between architectural and digital obstacles. There > are also analogies in the ways problems get solved, and in the defects > in these attempts to solve problems. One immediately obvious example > is the fact that the best, most efficient way to produce a work – be > it a Web video or site, or be it a bridge or a work of architecture – > a work that is is harmonious, complete and doesn't discriminate > anyone. > This way is accessible planning, i.e. a planning that keeps > accessibility in mind and respects the principles of "Design for all". > (...) this analogy between both worlds is confirmed by the fact that > an a posteriori adaptation, as the "egg-way" (6) in the case of > Calatrava's bridge, produces two parallel worlds but does not unite > them – just as with parallel Web sites made to offer an alternative > path for people with disabilities. How often have we chanced upon > alternative Web sites that ask the user: "Are you are you non-disabled > or non-seeing?", and if the person answers: "I'm non-seeing", she or > he gets invited to a different viewing, to a different path from the > one used by seeing people." > > Design-for-all or universal design might not be feasible in all cases, > but it should certainly be striven at. > > Best > > Claude > > (1) I tried to post something about it earlier but didn't even get the > "waiting for moderation" message, so there probably was a glitch. > (2) "Statement From the Office of Santiago Calatrava: Quarto Ponte sul > Canal Grande" <http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=197481> > (3) see <http://robertoscano.info/tag/calatrava/> - I also gathered > these and some more links on the issue at > <http://www.diigo.com/user/calmansi/%22Cacciari+accessibilit%C3%A0%22?tab=250>. > (4) For instance, in his comment to > <http://robertoscano.info/random-bits/calatrava-ci-siam-scordati-i-disabili-visivi/> > [Calatrava: did we forget people with visual disability?], Franco > Bomprezzi said "Actually, I had mentioned it in my open letter to > Cacciari that Roberto [Scano] published here too (...) But it is true > that common [run of the mill] accessibility culture concentrates on > people in wheelchairs, and anyway the obstacles they face don't get > eliminated either." Yet as to digital accessibility, the "common > culture" tends to focus only on visual obstacles... > (5) Video (with captions and transcriptions in Italian and English) in > <http://www.webmultimediale.org/videoblog/2008/08/venezia_ponte_di_calatrava_il.html> > (6) The "egg-way" (ovovia) "solution" is described further down in > the transcript in > <http://www.webmultimediale.org/videoblog/2008/08/venezia_ponte_di_calatrava_il.html>. > Pictures of the ovovia project in > <http://www.comune.venezia.it/flex/cm/pages/ServeBLOB.php/L/IT/IDPagina/3691>: > apart from the fact it doesn't address the obstacles for low-sighted > people, if I were wheelchair-bound, I'd absolutely hate the idea of > being imprisoned in a kind of UFO thing gliding outside the bridge on > a single axis for several minutes - especially on a windy day. > > On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 4:39 PM, Jayne Cravens > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Thanks to everyone who replied. Norbert Bollow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> >>I think this is a very important point: Sometimes it takes only a >>>very small amount of (wisely-directed) effort to achieve victories >>>of local significance. This is particularly significant given that >>>such relatively small, local victories are an essential precondition >>>for having any hope of any large-scale trend-setting breakthroughs. >>> >>>>>For example, I would suggest that in any and all informatics projects >>>(not only web development, but also of purely internal informatics >>>systems) the question should be raised whether accessibility concerns >>>are taken into consideration, and if not, why not. >> >> This is a commitment I would like to see everyone make -- for every >> online or tech-focused project you are on, ask, "Does this project >> meet the standards promoted by W3C? Will this online tool be >> accessible for someone who who has a sight-impairment? Someone with >> hearing impairments? Someone with limited hand movement? Someone >> using an assistive technology tool?" >> >> You will get a lot of arguments like "I don't think we serve that >> many people who have disabilities" or "that would be too expensive." >> You need to be prepared to address those arguments. Sites like >> http://www.w3.org/ and http://www.knowbility.org can help. But if >> just every person on the Digital Divide Network would ask those >> questions for any tech project they were involved with right now and >> in the future, commercial or nonprofit, imagine what an effect that >> would have. >> >> -- >> <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> >> Ms. Jayne Cravens MSc >> Bonn, Germany >> >> http://www.coyotecommunications.com >> >> Volunteer Coordinator >> http://www.aidworkers.net >> >> www.ivisit.com id: jcravens.4947 >> <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> > > > > > -- > Claude Almansi > _______________________________________________ > DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list > DIGITALDIVIDE@digitaldivide.net > http://digitaldivide.net/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide > To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE > in the body of the message. -- Xavier Leonard Heads On Fire :: Fab Lab 4305 University Avenue, Suite 130 San Diego, CA 92105 ph.:619.964.6522 fx.:954.208.9573 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.headsonfire.org "Change By Design" _______________________________________________ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@digitaldivide.net http://digitaldivide.net/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
