I'll never understand backlash against accessibility improvements. People fought against ramps and now they're the reason all people can have wheels on their luggage.
Accessibility is important.
Accessibility is important.
That said, most establishments here tend to have push/pull handles or sliding doors, doing away entirely with the notion of something you "twist."
I was using the example as an extreme. It's curious to me that in most debates, you'll find no shortage of contrarians.
More to the point: Ramp access and automatic doors are viable, proven improvements to accessibility. Levers? No so much.
I suppose I ought to re-iterate why I find the notion that a lever-operated door to be "more accessible" than a door knob suspect, particularly if you consider people with carpal tunnel, other wrist injuries, or osteoarthritis in their digits (particularly thumbs). In these populations, wrist movements of any kind may be painful or impossible. To that end, I would believe that simple handle-operated doors that require push/pull only access ought to be far more accessible.
But again, automatic doors are something of a comparative panacea regardless of the disability. If you can approach the door or push a button, you can gain access to the structure.
So what was your point again?
One of the big drivers of people getting cranky about accessibility is the number of lawsuits brought (USA), not to fix things but by vulture lawyers. It is a nice little scam especially when folks think they are complying with the law.