Rahul Gonsalves wrote:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colour_blindness#Prevalence>
However, the statistics given there seem misleading -- as according
to this linked page [1], there are 10 million men in the US alone who
are colour blind, while this page [2] suggests that in the US, there
are only 3.5 million people who are colour blind.
Guess that shows difference between what's known as "color blindness"
and "color deficiency". There's a deficiency-scale - not just different
forms, but both terms are used for both by many. Don't know how they
"count" in the US.
I suppose I should have made myself clearer as to why I was asking
for this information on this particular forum - I am writing a paper
on how one can design sensibly, and take into account various
impairments - colour blindness being one of them.
I'm not sure how useful statistics are when it comes to describing
methods. Statistics are "good" for clients and designers, but
"selective" and "discriminating" for users.
Belonging to large or small groups in a population shouldn't matter, and
certainly not on the web where the numbers may differ greatly from
what's found in the real world.
The virtual world has the potential to even out both minor and major
differences, but most of the "leveling" that's known to actually work,
takes place at the user-end.
To design sensibly makes sense to most, so I'm looking forward to see at
least some of what you come up with. However, statistics are something I
rather not see much of anywhere.
regards
Georg
PS: personally I find "extremely accessible" sites as hard to use as
"completely inaccessible" ones, but my experiences are not statistically
significant.
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
