In my case, for example, I wouldn’t say that I couldn’t avoid accessibility in my talk. I wouldn’t ever want to avoid it. In part, what I wanted to show was that JS is a tool that can cut both ways, and that we nee to be careful with it, but that we shouldn’t shun it entirely. JS has gotten a little bit of a “no accessibility here” reputation, and like Derek Featherstone, I’d like to show that’s not entirely the case.

Also, I think addressing intellectual disabilities is a LOT harder than other types. As a sighted, physically able person, I can approximate for a little while what it’s like to be blind (close my eyes) or paralyzed (force myself to sit still). No, these are not exact matches, but I can use those techniques to help imagine and empathize with those conditions.

But there’s no way I know of to even begin to simulate cognitive disability. I can’t even really imagine what it’s like to be less (or even more) intellectually capable than I am. That’s the extra challenge I think ID advocates face, and what a Web Accessibility Project could help promote. In that vein, I’m looking forward to what INMD produces along those lines: it’s important, and the more insight you can give us, the better!