CHI-WEB Archives

ACM SIGCHI WWW Human Factors (Open Discussion)


Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mary Deaton <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mary Deaton <[log in to unmask]>
Mon, 5 Nov 2007 16:14:13 -0800
text/plain (47 lines)

In graduate school, I actually did a study of what design principles
professional Web designers considered essential. They were asked to rank the
principles by importance or priority.

Almost none of them thought accessibility was a priority when they had to
assess priorities to meet schedules or when they were considering design

The reasoning was "it does not affect our audience." However, when I asked
if their audience included no deaf or visually impaired persons, they all
said they did not know or they assumed there must be some, but it was still
not a priority.

I know for a fact that at least one of these people worked at Microsoft.
When talking with other designers and with clients, I get the same response.
There is also a popular variation: the number of disabled customers is not
sufficient to justify the additional cost.

This is so sad when you consider how easy it is to make sites accessible if
you just declare it a necessity from Day One.

On 11/5/07, William Hudson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I have seen so many people react the same way when I tell them that their
> web site or intranet is breaking disability discrimination laws

> Has anyone else seen these kinds of reactions? Does this model seem to fit
> with other people's experience?

Mary Deaton
Deaton Interactive Design and SodaBlue Partners
Tools of the UX Trade -

           Tip of the Day: Postings must be in plain text
     CHI-WEB: POSTINGS: mailto:[log in to unmask]
              MODERATORS: mailto:[log in to unmask]