Hi Maria & Whitney, @Whitney, thanks for you like, it brings new stuff to me.
@Maria > > So testing a web service with a blind user is just the first step. We > will then proceed testing the service with users with other kind of > sensory-motor disabilites. > > Our stop-point with the blind user was when the user was supposed to > personalize the page. > > The fact that in LR blind users are not able to personalize the page > was seen as not essential to the interaction with the page itself. My > question is rather this is true or not. If they are your target user group, of cuz, personalize is not essential to your designing interaction. This more or less depends on how your design afford your user's activity ( major or trivial, in other word, essential or not ). for universal design or not, maybe majorly characterized by user's group properties, if the group large enough and styles spread very average. The common affordance for the common activity, will be called essential, else not. So here, we may deduce a principle to judge if it's essential or not, if the design's affordance is for the common activities across the user group, it *may* lays at the essential interaction, else not. is this make sense? Regards, Jarod -- http://designforuse.blogspot.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
