I do not completely agree with this reading. For one, it states that "Web 2.0 is only accessible if excluded groups want to use it and it also benefits them." If that is the case then Web 2.0 is never going to be "accessible". By this I mean, there is no way that everything on the web is going to interest everyone, there is too much on it and people are too diverse in their interests. I, for instance, am never going to want to use the web to do anything related to sports, therefore by the articles definition the web is not accessible. Another example, my grandparents use the web only to check their email, they have no interest in doing anything else on it, so therefore it is not accessible to them either.
The website for blind individuals is a wonderful idea. The fact that they members have basically formed their own community to help one another out when using the internet is great. The second site sounds a great deal like their own personal version of a dating site almost. Though I feel this one is more of an interacting site than a dating site, I think it's also a great idea.
In general it seems like websites are becoming much easier for people with disabilities to use. The sections talking about the popularity of iPods really proves this point. To make things accessible for iPods and even cell phones is something that really helps people with disabilities.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree with your points. I also think that there is way too much on the web and people are too diverse in their interests.
ReplyDeleteThe site for blind people was one of the parts of the reading I found the most interesting. It shows that technology is getting better for people with disadvantages of different types.
I definitely think that making sites for people with disabilities is an awesome idea, and if some tech-savvy granny came up with a social networking site for the old folks, I'm sure it would be a hit.
ReplyDelete