[bookport] Re: Labeling Chargers

  • From: "Tim Snyder" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 15:56:55 -0500

Hi List,

A simple solution would be to label the charger with raised print letters BP. That could be described in the manual for those who have not learned the print letters. Then those who do not know print could learn the print letters and others who already know print could touch the letters. That gets around the difficulty of many people not knowing braille. It is just as reasonable for the charger to be labeled with raised print letters as for devices that sighted people use to be labeled with print letters that are not raised.
Tim

----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Buhrow" <buhrow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 11:09 AM
Subject: [bookport] Re: Labeling Chargers


Hello Carl.  The reason we were discussing chargers was because the
new Bookport, not yet out, will most likely have an AC adaptor to charge
its rechargable battery.  Gary Wunder asked that if the new Bookport did
have an included wall wart, that it be marked in a tactile manner so that
he could identify it as belonging with the Bookport. Several folks on this
list then suggested that his request was over the top and that he should
just learn to label his chargers himself.  While that might be a good
consumer strategy, I object to the notion that it is an unreasonable
request.  While I don't expect products designed for sighted users to
contain features deliberately helpful to the blind, I do expect this from
products which are designed for use by the blind, and,I believe, that in
most cases, products designed for use by the blind are insufficiently
marked, either in braille or via some tactile means, when compared with the
equivalent markings in print which exist on the devices.  This has always
been true, and I fear that we, as blind consumers, have come to accept this state of affairs as just. My point is not that I believe all controls need to be marked with braille, but rather that having tactile marks on a device
in order that this device is just as useful and identifiable to a blind
user as it is to a sighted user is a reasonable request to make.  Further,
I do realize that print is king, and it always trumps braille or other
nonvisual markings, but I want to point out that when this rule is applied
to the manufacture of devices for the blind, it does make the statement
that the non-print reading user isn't as important as the print reading
user is.  It's subttle, pervasive, and I don't expect it to change, but I
don't want users to get complacent and feel that they don't deserve equal
treatment if they don't read print.
If APH doesn't comply with Gary's request, I'll understand, but I, for
one, think they should try.
-Brian




Other related posts: