[bct] Disability rights for all

  • From: "Neal Ewers" <neal.ewers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 11:54:06 -0600

Dan, I took the liberty of changing the subject.

Of course, you are right about captioning, and the nice thing about this
is that works for people other than people who are hard of hearing.
Some, who have certain learning disabilities, like to have both captions
and speech because this works better for them.  Of course, that is not
why the captioning of TV programs, etc. was done, but it is a nice end
result for lots of people.  When I worked for Trace, we always tried to
base our claims for work done for persons with disabilities on the fact
that it would help non-disabled people as well.  So, to the extent that
we can discover our needs and relate them to some benefit that will be
accrued by others, the better off we will be.  This is why screen
readers cost so much.  Few other people need them badly enough to pay
that kind of money.  However, were they to be built into the OS, as
Apple tried to do, people whose vision were failing could learn to use
them while they could still see, thus making it easier for them to use
once all their sight was gone.


-----Original Message-----
From: blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of The Scarlet
Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 11:44 AM
To: blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bct] Re: Podcast on comparing JAWS and Window-Eyes

Neal, this is quite true in some regards, but not in others.  For
the hard of hearing community has managed to get a majority of
broadcasts closed captioned while we can bareley get a tiny fraction of 
programming done in DVS.

I too, have wondered about the extra kick on the IRS standard deduction
the blind or even the free matter for the blind mailings.

There are odd inequities for different disabilities, and some, as you
noted, make little or no sense.


Other related posts:

  • » [bct] Disability rights for all