[Buildingdata] Re: Extensions to linkingyou (accessibility; publication-scheme)

[Andy Turner]

Hi,

I'm not sure if this will help.

Anyway, in terms of an organisation and access and accessibility there are
both physical and virtual components and the information about physical
access can make it more accessible.

For a building which may contain parts of many organisations and specific
facilities, it may have physical access ports into the building
(entries/exits) and its accessibility will depend on the routes to these
from places on the outside and from places on the inside. Some ports might
be one way, such as an emergency exit or might only be open to some users
if a door is held open (for instance, it may locks from the outside when
closed) (this is true of some ports within buildings too). Anyway, access
routes within a building and to a building effect its accessibility. It is
nice that there is a link between the physical access to a building and the
information provided about this. One goal is to provide a map and
directions appropriate for different types of users that are accessing
specific organisations or facilities within a building. The best routes
will depend on the location of the user and any constraints they have which
restrict their movements. So yes, some people might for example have a fear
of lifts and normally travel short distances using a wheelchair. Some
places are more accessible as the routes to them are undercover or are
indoors, but how indoors is it to be considered within the building.

As much as we want people to be defined in terms of their abilities, in
terms of access, people are restricted by their inabilities and in this
respect I think it is fine to talk about disabled access and access routes
suited to people with particular physical access constraints. I hope that
helps to some extent with terminology. Sorry if it doesn't.

Best wishes,

Andy


On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 11:22 PM, Alexander Dutton <
alexander.dutton at it.ox.ac.uk> wrote:

> Hi Chris,
>
> On 08/11/13 13:19, Christopher Gutteridge wrote:
> > I suggest that what we need is
> > web-accessibility
> > - a page describing the digital accessibility policy, features or tools
> > for this organisation's websites
>
> Sounds reasonable.
>
> > physical-accessibility [[ not sure this really counts in things like
> > blindness etc? better term?]]
> > - a page describing physical accessibility policy, features and tools
> > for this organisations physical locations
>
> I was wary about calling it "physical accessibility", as it implies a
> physical disability on the part of the person. I know little about such
> things, but mental health issues and disorders may need to be catered
> for in describing how accessible a building or space is. Perhaps
> "space-accesibility"?
>
> I was planning on using such a term for both the organisation ("here's
> the access guide") and its places ("here's the access page for this
> building"). I realise this is a departure from the rest of the
> linkingyou terms, but hopefully it's not that controversial.
>
> > ico-publication-scheme
> >
> > - a page describing the ico mandated publication scheme for this
> > organisation
>
> I'm happy with the extra qualification.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Alex
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Buildingdata mailing list
> Buildingdata at ecs.soton.ac.uk
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/buildingdata
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/buildingdata/attachments/20131111/577c4fd4/attachment.html