Update index.md #37
Update index.md #37
Conversation
Edited section "Accessibility and Usability" to reduce sentence complexity and front-load content.
| or noisy environments. Accessibility also addresses functional | ||
| limitations aquired by age, even though some people may not identify | ||
| these as "disability". | ||
| Accessibility primarily focuses on people with disabilities. Many accessibility requirements improve usability for everyone, especially in limiting situations. For example, providing sufficient contrast benefits people using the web on a mobile device in bright sunlight or in a dark room. Captions benefit people in noisy and in quiet environments. Some people have age-related functional limitations, and may not identify these as "disability". Accessibility addresses these situations too. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- Removed "But" from the start of the sentence
- Removed "color" from "contrast" (because it is actually luminosity contrast ratio, not color)
- Removed "elderly people", especially because "agre-related functional limitations already says that
- Removed second occurrence of "functional limitations"
| considerations such as assistive technologies. However, the needs of | ||
| people with disabilities are often not sufficiently addressed in | ||
| usability practice and research. | ||
| - **Requirements that are technical and relate to the underlying code rather than to the visual appearance**. For example, they ensure that websites work well with assistive technologies. This includes screen readers that read aloud content, and screen magnifiers that enlarge content. Voice recognitition software used to input text is another form of assistive technology. These aspects are typically not a focus of usability research and practice. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- Changed "web pages" to "content", to also apply to applications, ePub, and other web contexts
- Reduced number of occurrences of "assistive technologies"
- Fixed grammar
| people with disabilities are often not sufficiently addressed in | ||
| usability practice and research. | ||
| - **Requirements that are technical and relate to the underlying code rather than to the visual appearance**. For example, they ensure that websites work well with assistive technologies. This includes screen readers that read aloud content, and screen magnifiers that enlarge content. Voice recognitition software used to input text is another form of assistive technology. These aspects are typically not a focus of usability research and practice. | ||
| - **Requirements that relate to user interaction and visual design**. Inadequate design can cause significant barriers for people with disabilities. That is why they are included. For example, understandable instructions and feedback for website forms and applications is good usability. They also help people with cognitive and learning disabilities. Without such requirements, some people with disabilities may be excluded from using the Web. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- Removed repetitive "user interaction and visual design"
- Technical issue: user interaction and visual design does not cause accessibility barriers, but rather their bad design
- Added back "for example" because this is only one of many examples
- Changed "impairment" to "disability" (we tend to avoid using "impairment" because it is rather medical
- Changed "cognitive or learning" to "cognitive and learning" because this is the more commonly used terminology
- Fixed grammar and spelling
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks @nitedog. I'm happy enough with these corrections.
Regarding impairment vs disability, we could probably have a long discussion on the merits of one over another :) I won't argue the toss, though in my background of disability rights and independent living, a lot of people view disability as something caused by the environment (e.g stairs), whereas the impairment is what the person has (paraplegia causing the use of a wheelchair). That's where I come from when I use impairment - not at all a medical perspective.
Regarding "cognitive or learning" vs "cognitive and learning", I won't argue about it either. But to explain the rationale, using the word "and" could lead some people to think both cognitive and learning are always tied together. Perhaps a better approach would be and/or but that becomes a mouthful.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks @vavroom.
Regarding disability vs impairment - I agree with you on the connotation of these terms. Since we want to emphasize the fact that design is what excludes people, especially people with cognitive and learning disabilities, I think the term "disability" is better in this paragraph and sentence.
Regarding and/or - I don't feel strongly but it threw me off because I'm so used to "people with cognitive and learning disabilities" as the common reference. Is this only me, or is there generally change towards using "people with cognitive or learning disabilities"?
Edited section "Accessibility and Usability" to reduce sentence complexity and front-load content.