The challenge initially seems to be quantifying what all the users
need to be able to do, regardless of their (dis)abilities. Once you
have established those requirements (like 'must be able to add
applications to their page'), it's much more approachable to make
decisions about whether or not you need to solve a particular issue
that crops up. Obviously, if it's critical to the functionality of the
site/device/etc. then it must be solved. Otherwise, you can make
decisions on how important it is and consider it as part of the
'progressive enhancement' process.
That last concept is an important semantic and mental shift away from
(as Whitney pointed out) the 'lowest common denominator' or 'graceful
degradation' approach. By ensuring that all the required functions are
there and all critical tasks can be accomplished by ALL users, you can
then make better decisions about adding touches that will enhance the
experience of those users with newer browsers, increased capabilities,
etc.
So really it's starting with reframing your question - rather than
figuring out when to 'stop trying' - start with 'we have to meet these
criteria' and then build up the experience from there.
Cheers,
Jason
Jason Pamental
director, interactive/technology
(add)ventures
117 chapman street
providence, ri 02905
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.addventures.com
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
