{
  "_description": "本文件由 data/ 生成：请改动来源文件，不要改这里。各字段的证据边界见接入指南。",
  "schemaVersion": "1.0.0",
  "kind": "entry",
  "locale": "zh-CN",
  "id": "universal-design",
  "name": {
    "zh": "通用设计",
    "en": "Universal Design"
  },
  "page": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/universal-design/",
  "self": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/universal-design.json",
  "alternates": {
    "zh-CN": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/universal-design.json",
    "en": "https://designvocabulary.com/en/entries/universal-design.json"
  },
  "site": {
    "catalogSchemaVersion": "0.1.0",
    "entries": 158,
    "index": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/index.json",
    "query": "https://designvocabulary.com/api/query?lang=zh",
    "guide": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/agents/",
    "llms": "https://designvocabulary.com/llms.txt"
  },
  "provenance": {
    "sourceBacked": [
      "entry.definition"
    ],
    "editorial": [
      "entry.boundary",
      "entry.signature",
      "entry.when",
      "entry.when_not",
      "entry.tradeoff",
      "entry.comparison",
      "entry.rules",
      "entry.relations",
      "entry.implementationNote",
      "entry.philosophy"
    ],
    "scope": "定义参考以上来源；数字界面示例、选择建议、条件关系及配方由本样例编辑，尚未经用户研究验证。",
    "editorialStatus": "drafted",
    "specimenData": "fictional",
    "specimenNote": "示例为原创虚构界面；定义附来源，用法与配方为编辑建议。",
    "sources": [
      {
        "id": "ncsu-cud",
        "url": "https://design.ncsu.edu/research/center-for-universal-design/",
        "title": "NC State University · Center for Universal Design",
        "checkedAt": "2026-09-15",
        "archive": {
          "status": "available",
          "confirmed": true,
          "url": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260916035420/https://design.ncsu.edu/research/center-for-universal-design/",
          "capturedAt": "2026-09-16T03:54:20Z",
          "lookupUrl": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260915*/https://design.ncsu.edu/research/center-for-universal-design/"
        }
      },
      {
        "id": "ixdf-universal-design",
        "url": "https://ixdf.org/literature/topics/universal-design",
        "title": "Interaction Design Foundation · Universal Design",
        "checkedAt": "2026-09-15",
        "archive": {
          "status": "available",
          "confirmed": true,
          "url": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260302215936/https://ixdf.org/literature/topics/universal-design",
          "capturedAt": "2026-03-02T21:59:36Z",
          "lookupUrl": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260915*/https://ixdf.org/literature/topics/universal-design"
        }
      },
      {
        "id": "w3c-wai-accessibility-usability-inclusion",
        "url": "https://www.w3.org/WAI/fundamentals/accessibility-usability-inclusion/",
        "title": "W3C WAI · Accessibility, Usability, and Inclusion",
        "checkedAt": "2026-09-15",
        "archive": {
          "status": "available",
          "confirmed": true,
          "url": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260916040322/https://www.w3.org/WAI/fundamentals/accessibility-usability-inclusion/",
          "capturedAt": "2026-09-16T04:03:22Z",
          "lookupUrl": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260915*/https://www.w3.org/WAI/fundamentals/accessibility-usability-inclusion/"
        }
      }
    ],
    "lists": [
      {
        "id": "H-C",
        "edition": "classic",
        "seat": 4,
        "origin": "issue-1-ledger",
        "page": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/lists/H-C/",
        "json": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/lists/H-C.json"
      },
      {
        "id": "H-Y",
        "edition": "2026-focus",
        "seat": 4,
        "origin": "issue-1-ledger",
        "page": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/lists/H-Y/",
        "json": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/lists/H-Y.json"
      }
    ],
    "ordered": false,
    "listDisclaimer": "席位号是编辑位置，不是评分、排名或人气统计；清单未收满时保持原样，不补足。"
  },
  "entry": {
    "id": "universal-design",
    "type": "philosophy",
    "name": {
      "zh": "通用设计",
      "en": "Universal Design"
    },
    "aliases": [
      "Design for All",
      "泛用设计"
    ],
    "granularity": "experience",
    "intents": [
      "include-users",
      "prevent-error"
    ],
    "tags": [
      "通用设计",
      "单一方案",
      "可感知信息",
      "容错",
      "无障碍"
    ],
    "definition": "由 Ron Mace 与北卡州立大学通用设计中心提出的方法论：产品和环境的设计应尽最大可能让最广泛的人群直接使用，无需事后改造或专门设计；由此发展出七项设计原则（公平使用、灵活使用、简单直观、可感知信息、容错、省力、适当的尺寸与空间），指导如何减少对特殊适配的依赖。",
    "boundary": "与包容性设计相邻但方法不同：通用设计追求一个能覆盖最广泛人群的主流方案，包容性设计则承认不同群体可能需要多个针对性方案，方法上是'为一个人解决、扩展给更多人'。通用设计也不等同于无障碍合规：无障碍聚焦残障人群与达标检查，通用设计的关注范围更广，强调在设计阶段就让尽可能多的人直接使用，而不是先做出主流方案、再单独打补丁式地满足合规要求。",
    "signature": [
      "同一套界面或流程，能力、年龄、使用情境不同的人都能直接完成任务，无需切换到特殊模式",
      "关键信息至少以两种可感知的方式呈现，不依赖单一感官或单一使用环境",
      "误操作的后果被主动降低，而不是要求用户格外小心或具备更强的体力"
    ],
    "when": [
      "设计面向广泛人群且难以为每个群体单独定制方案时（如公共服务、教育、政务类产品）",
      "定义关键信息的呈现方式、操作路径的容错与省力程度时",
      "产品必须同时被不同能力、年龄和使用情境的人群共用同一入口时"
    ],
    "when_not": [
      "把无障碍合规检查通过当作已经完成通用设计",
      "只验证了一类典型用户，却以'适用所有人'为名对外宣称",
      "面对需求差异悬殊的群体仍坚持只做一个方案，而不考虑是否该转向包容性设计的多方案路径"
    ],
    "tradeoff": "追求一个能覆盖最广泛人群的主流方案，可能在某些具体群体的需求上不如为其量身定制的方案贴合；该坚持一个方案、还是转向包容性设计的多方案路径，需要权衡覆盖面与贴合度。",
    "comparison": {
      "focus": "能否设计出一个覆盖最广泛人群的主流方案",
      "mechanism": "七项原则：公平使用、灵活使用、简单直观、可感知信息、容错、省力、适当的尺寸与空间",
      "cost": "覆盖面越广，对单一群体需求的贴合度可能越有限"
    },
    "sources": [
      {
        "id": "ncsu-cud",
        "title": "NC State University · Center for Universal Design",
        "url": "https://design.ncsu.edu/research/center-for-universal-design/",
        "claim": "给出由 Ron Mace 主持的工作组制定的定义：通用设计是让产品和环境在最大程度上被所有人使用、无需事后改造或专门设计，并将 Mace 列为该中心创始人。",
        "checkedAt": "2026-09-15",
        "archive": {
          "lookupUrl": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260915*/https://design.ncsu.edu/research/center-for-universal-design/",
          "status": "available",
          "checkedAt": "2026-09-16T03:53:56.103Z",
          "jobId": "spn2-15c8396c3e5de281487743662256961852100c9b",
          "url": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260916035420/https://design.ncsu.edu/research/center-for-universal-design/",
          "timestamp": "20260916035420"
        }
      },
      {
        "id": "ixdf-universal-design",
        "title": "Interaction Design Foundation · Universal Design",
        "url": "https://ixdf.org/literature/topics/universal-design",
        "claim": "列出七项原则，并说明通用设计与包容性设计在方法上的区别：通用设计为最广泛人群创建单一方案，包容性设计则可能为不同群体提供多个方案。",
        "checkedAt": "2026-09-15",
        "archive": {
          "lookupUrl": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260915*/https://ixdf.org/literature/topics/universal-design",
          "status": "available",
          "checkedAt": "2026-09-23T12:02:44.897Z",
          "jobId": "spn2-51186743a16520822d67550fb0999c5bb7cd25c8",
          "url": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260302215936/https://ixdf.org/literature/topics/universal-design",
          "timestamp": "20260302215936"
        }
      },
      {
        "id": "w3c-wai-accessibility-usability-inclusion",
        "title": "W3C WAI · Accessibility, Usability, and Inclusion",
        "url": "https://www.w3.org/WAI/fundamentals/accessibility-usability-inclusion/",
        "claim": "指出无障碍聚焦残障人群、不试图涵盖更广泛的多样性议题，而通用设计/包容性设计关注的范围更广；支持本条目'通用设计不等同于无障碍合规'的边界说明。",
        "checkedAt": "2026-09-15",
        "archive": {
          "lookupUrl": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260915*/https://www.w3.org/WAI/fundamentals/accessibility-usability-inclusion/",
          "status": "available",
          "checkedAt": "2026-09-16T04:02:34.126Z",
          "jobId": "spn2-6fc5b1a49bf413682633a5ea0878933662a71a3d",
          "url": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260916040322/https://www.w3.org/WAI/fundamentals/accessibility-usability-inclusion/",
          "timestamp": "20260916040322"
        }
      }
    ],
    "relations": [
      {
        "target": "inclusive-design",
        "kind": "related",
        "condition": "决定用一个主流方案，还是为不同群体提供多个方案",
        "reason": "两者都关注让更广泛的人群可用，但通用设计倾向设计单一主流方案，包容性设计倾向先识别具体排除、再针对性地提供多个方案；混用二者会让团队误以为做出一个方案就等同于已经包容。",
        "basis": "editorial"
      },
      {
        "target": "human-centered-design",
        "kind": "composes_with",
        "condition": "验证同一方案能否被不同能力和情境的人群直接使用",
        "reason": "七项原则给出了设计目标，但方案是否真的可感知、可容错，仍需要通过以人为中心的迭代与真实使用者验证，而不是仅凭原则清单自我核对。",
        "basis": "editorial"
      },
      {
        "target": "error-prevention",
        "kind": "realized_by",
        "condition": "落实容错与省力原则",
        "reason": "容错原则要求降低误操作后果，错误预防中的约束、确认与可撤销等界面策略是具体的实现手段之一。",
        "basis": "editorial"
      }
    ],
    "rules": [
      {
        "when": "呈现方向、状态或警示等关键信息时",
        "instruction": "必须以至少两种冗余的可感知方式呈现（如文字与图标并用、声音与视觉并用），不能只依赖单一感官通道。",
        "strength": "must",
        "basis": "editorial"
      },
      {
        "when": "同一功能可能面向能力、年龄或使用情境差异很大的人群",
        "instruction": "优先设计一个所有人都能直接使用的主流方案；只有在确有必要时，才为特定群体增加特殊模式或单独适配。",
        "strength": "recommend",
        "basis": "editorial"
      },
      {
        "when": "设计操作路径与交互反馈",
        "instruction": "降低误操作的后果、减少完成任务所需的体力与精细动作，而不是要求用户格外小心。",
        "strength": "recommend",
        "basis": "editorial"
      }
    ],
    "philosophy": {
      "values": [
        "最广泛的可用性",
        "减少对特殊适配的依赖",
        "可感知与容错"
      ],
      "tension": "覆盖最广泛人群的单一方案，与特定群体的贴合需要",
      "questions": [
        "这个方案不做任何调整，能被尽可能多的人直接使用吗？",
        "关键信息是否只依赖一种感官或一种使用环境才能被感知？"
      ]
    },
    "demo": null,
    "version": "0.1.0",
    "editorialStatus": "drafted",
    "requirements": [],
    "demoCapabilities": [],
    "implementationNote": "尚无可操作样例；插图为编辑示意。应用到产品时仍须核实：七项原则是否针对具体功能逐条检查过、关键信息的冗余呈现是否真的覆盖了目标人群的感知差异，以及当单一方案确实无法覆盖某些群体时，是否已经转向包容性设计的多方案路径。",
    "image": {
      "src": "/images/universal-design.webp",
      "alt": "一条宽阔的门廊兼坡道，通向一个名为 FIELDNOTES 的虚构界面，一位使用拐杖的人物、一位推着婴儿车的人物和一个孩子并排走入其中。"
    },
    "searchTerms": [
      "universal design",
      "single solution",
      "perceptible information",
      "tolerance for error",
      "accessibility"
    ]
  }
}