yes, and one way to make the problem go away is to design for all.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Chapin" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 1:49 PM
Subject: Re: Web Access; When the Rubber Meets the Road


> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Poehlman [mailto:[log in to unmask]]

> making assumptions seems to be quite troublesome so rather than make
> assumptions, we should work so that all can enjoy.
>
You can't not make assumptions.  You're assuming that there's somebody
out
there with minimal software.

There's a cost to the designer for that assumption.  The cost is in the
flexibility of their design and the work needed to make sure that it
works
with all the various configurations out there.

I'm quite willing to argue that the cost is reasonable when it's the
only
way to make a site accessible. I'm not prepared to tell a designer he
should
accept that cost because somebody out there is too damn lazy to install
the
latest software.

Remember that I'm arguing that better software should be made available
at
little or no cost.  I should point out that this is not the standard way
of
dealing with problems in this country.  Nobody would argue for lowering
speed limits to 4 mph and requiring books to be printed in 72 point so
that
the near-sighted can avoid buying glasses.  Nor, as somebody who wears
glasses, would I expect them to.  But I have wondered why glasses, which
are
critical to compensate for a medical problem, namely misshaped lens in
the
eye, are never covered by insurance.

Rather than trying to work around the problem of people having poor
software, we need to work on ways of making the problem go away.