Merge pull request #338 from w3c/eric_bugfix_Apr2024

lseeman · web-flow · commit 2aaedb90133b · 2024-04-18T16:11:06.000+03:00
Update index.html, removed duplicate point
diff --git a/gap-analysis/index.html b/gap-analysis/index.html
@@ -159,8 +159,6 @@ <h2>Introduction</h2>
 				<li>There is a wide range of cognitive disabilities; each type of impairment is different, with diverse symptoms and particular digital accessibility requirements. This adds to the complexity of knowing how to address user needs.</li>
 				<li>The advice given in the research and available guidance is often vague and is not testable. So, even if developers read the research they would not know exactly what to do or when they have reached an acceptable level of accessibility.</li>
 			    <li>Another major challenge is capturing difficulties related to cognitive disabilities that may be undeclared. People with cognitive disabilities may be embarrassed about their disabilities and may be less likely to request accommodations. They may be       afraid of discrimination, especially in the work place. Others are not aware of their disability or of the impact it has on their functioning.</li>
-                   <li>Attitudes and misinformation can       also become a barrier to inclusion for people with cognitive disabilities.       For example, developers that may feel people with cognitive disabilities       are not in their &quot;target audience&quot; and so have no interest in their inclusion. Also, studies of usability often over-sample college students. This       can mean that the results work less well for those inadequately       represented among sub-groups of college students (such the aging       population).</li>
-			
               <li>Attitudes and misinformation can also become a barrier to inclusion for people with cognitive disabilities. For example, developers that may feel people with cognitive disabilities are not in their “target audience” and so have no interest in their inclusion. Also, studies of usability often over-sample college students. Thus the results work less well for groups who are not well represented among sub-groups of college students (such the aging population).</li>
               <li>Accessibility has typically been based upon the assumption that any website can be designed to be usable by people with disabilities. However, when making a website usable for people with cognitive disabilities, the content itself may need to be changed (e.g. simplified), or support adaptability (e.g. multi-modal delivery).</li>
             </ul>

-Original file line number
+Diff line change
 				<li>There is a wide range of cognitive disabilities; each type of impairment is different, with diverse symptoms and particular digital accessibility requirements. This adds to the complexity of knowing how to address user needs.li>
 				<li>The advice given in the research and available guidance is often vague and is not testable. So, even if developers read the research they would not know exactly what to do or when they have reached an acceptable level of accessibility.li>
 			    <li>Another major challenge is capturing difficulties related to cognitive disabilities that may be undeclared. People with cognitive disabilities may be embarrassed about their disabilities and may be less likely to request accommodations. They may be       afraid of discrimination, especially in the work place. Others are not aware of their disability or of the impact it has on their functioning.li>
 -                   <li>Attitudes and misinformation can       also become a barrier to inclusion for people with cognitive disabilities.       For example, developers that may feel people with cognitive disabilities       are not in their "target audience" and so have no interest in their inclusion. Also, studies of usability often over-sample college students. This       can mean that the results work less well for those inadequately       represented among sub-groups of college students (such the aging       population).li>
+-
               <li>Attitudes and misinformation can also become a barrier to inclusion for people with cognitive disabilities. For example, developers that may feel people with cognitive disabilities are not in their “target audience” and so have no interest in their inclusion. Also, studies of usability often over-sample college students. Thus the results work less well for groups who are not well represented among sub-groups of college students (such the aging population).li>
               <li>Accessibility has typically been based upon the assumption that any website can be designed to be usable by people with disabilities. However, when making a website usable for people with cognitive disabilities, the content itself may need to be changed (e.g. simplified), or support adaptability (e.g. multi-modal delivery).li>
             ul>