Accessibility questions have come up on several lists recently, with an interesting twist. People were looking for answers not about exactly what they had to do, but why. What problem, for example, does a WCAG 2.0 checkpoint answer? Invariably, someone posts an explanation in terms of a story. Putting the guideline into a human context makes it easier to get your head around the "why". And that, in turn makes it easier to come up with a great design solution--one that not only meets the guideline, but does so in a delightful way.

Several years ago, a friend called me. He was working on his web site and wanted to know where he could find a text-only browser to test it with. He'd been told that it was important that it work without any images, but couldn't figure out why this made a difference, especially since he couldn't even find a browser that didn't display images.

To him, this seemed like an arbitrary rule, based on outdated technology. Of course, this guideline is not about technology, but about people. When he started to think about people, he immediately got the point. I didn't have to tell much of a story, just the beginning: "Imagine if you couldn't see the images...would your site make sense?"