Re: Accessibility or lack thereof? was Re: The Latest Darcy and Holly Show

  • From: Steve Holmes <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 21:58:33 -0700

Hash: RIPEMD160

On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 05:02:00PM -0000, Dj Paddy wrote:
> How would you guys then define accessibility Vs usibility?

Very good question.  I've given a lot of thought to this comparison.  I
think of usibility as being able to just use it no matter how difficult
it might actually be.  Where I think of accessibility as being able to
use the product with no inconveniences.  There is obviously a continuum
between these ends but If an object is really accessible, one would be
able to use it with no help or work-arounds from anyone.  If something
is barely usable, one might have to jump through many hoops just to
scrape by and use a limitted set of its features.

I think some examples would need to be in order to be able to make this
point more comprehendable.  Take many of these audio players (besides,
this keeps it more on topic <heh); We might be able to count menu clicks
from an assumed starting position and get the player's basic functions
to work but we have no means of confirming or verifying results or
messages from the unit.  I would consider this to be more or less usible
but certainly not accessible.  Where if we take an Iriver that is
capable and load rockbox on it, it now voices all its menus and messages
so now the unit is truely accessible.  I have a VIP 1000 thermostat at
home.  it is self voicing thus it is accessible.  It occurs to me that
accessibility is a subset of usibility.  you can't have something that
is accessible but not usible but you can have something that is usible
but not accessible.

Wow! does this long winded answer make sense?:)

- -- 
HolmesGrown Solutions
The best solutions for the best price!
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)


Other related posts: