The implied undertone was that all others should accommodate the author and change themselves to better interact with the author so that his needs were met and he could be a productive member of the work force.
But what does that imply the other way around? If I were to write a play book like this, were this person to also adapt to my ways/wants? Or would this be too much to ask?
Working in any professional environment to me implies adapting to others around at least a bit (without loosing what makes out our personality). Out of respect to other human beings alone I think this is decent human behavior.
But as said, to me these writings sound like excuses to expect one sided adaption and I could say "pampering". But maybe that is just me.
I was using this style of enquiry with new hires 20+ years ago as a natural step to ensure we would get the best out of them - it just seemed like an obvious thing to do.
I don't like sticking square pegs in round holes so if by understanding, and being able to accommodate, personal characteristics, we can make the person more comfortable they'll generally contribute more, faster, and better.
You hate travelling in rush-hour? fine, set your own hours to fit in with the team requirements.
E.g. for myself I'd say: "No distractions - if I'm obviously focused on something do NOT disturb me - send an email" and "I'm productive when my brain gets intensely into something - when it doesn't I don't sit around I go do something else" and "I work better in darkness or dim light, or overnight" and "Sometimes I need to do intense random brain-storming sessions to clear the crap out my head".