It’s interesting with this week’s readings (and some of the other readings during the course of this semester) taking me back to issues like accessibility, sustainability, and visual organization that were (still are) commonly addressed in the architecture field. It also reminds me of statements made by both Dr. Cohen and Dr. Rosenzweig about the numerous correlations between new media and architecture.
For example, the book Dive Into Accessibility delves into subjects such as design priniciples, disabilities, and audience. Each one of these elements are integral to the execution of any successful design whether it be for a space or website. Another book, Building Accessible Websites, addresses similar issues, in addition to certification and testing of websites, copyright laws, language codes, multimedia uses, and type and colors specifically as it relates to people with color-blindness. Of course, I have to mention the author’s healthy discussions on CSS and HTML (but I prefer skipping over it for the sake of my own lack of mental “accessibility” to complete understanding of them), but I will spare us all!
The two articles from WebAim, “Designing for Screen Reader Compatibility” and “Creating Accessible Javascript” are quite different in their content. Nonetheless, there are “tidbits” to glean from each one. For instance, the importance of screen readers to blind people is a good point. In the first article, the author states, “…without them they would need to rely on other individuals to read the content out loud to them.” And even though I have had to design thousands of spaces considering ADA codes (design commerical spaces for people with disabilities according to laws), honestly I have not thought about the connection to new media until I read these books and articles. In the second article, the author not only clearly defines the differences between Javascript, HTML, Java, and other applications, but emphasizes Javascript as a platform to “increase accessibility” to those with disabilities as well as the common reader.
I found these books and articles particularly insightful, and challenged my own thinking when it comes to designing websites accessible to all no matter the cicumstance or situation. It certainly encourages a new way of thinking outside the box.
It has been remarkable in the Two Clio’s to learn about all of the issues involved in web design as a medium, from the perils of digitization and building in archival redundancy to the security issues, obsolescence issues and now disability issues. It is a wonder that anything works, and I am always left thinking that as wonderful as it is, the Internet world is in many ways a house of cards. It is so complex on the one hand, and so many people are thinking about it deeply and with care, but it seems at bottom very ephemeral, especially with changing technology. I suppose it is not more ephemeral than paper, or writing on skins, or Indian dust-board mathematics which gave us what we call “Arabic numerals” but which lasted only long enough to solve a problem, and then were whisked off the board. Between the Chinese and the Arabs and the Greek mathematical legacy (not to forget the Babylonian, Persian and Egyptian, we have a system of communicating numbers. Just when we have it, we reduce it all to 0’s and 1’s. Yikes.
By: susanld on April 12, 2009
at 11:32 pm
I’m amazed at how far you have come from the beginning, starting from scratch without a lot of experience. You have obviously done a lot of work. That’s getting on my nerves.
By: carbonbasedcaveman on April 13, 2009
at 6:22 pm