W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg-access@w3.org > October 2007

Re: Business cases Re: Summary of last weeks discussion...

From: Alan Chuter <achuter@technosite.es>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 11:41:11 +0100
Message-ID: <79cab0900710300341y48db32d8wad1e25d1cfc4c4cf@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Mobile Web Accessibility Task Force" <public-bpwg-access@w3.org>, EOWG <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
I agree with you both, but the intention is to say that the
information can be the basis for a business case. The text I used is:
"It attempts to provide a basis for building the business case".
Perhaps it should be "provide information for".

On the other hand, a business case is important. It seems that while
Web accessibility advocates have to argue the case with whatever
justification they can, be it increased turnover, human rights, ease
of maintenance or whatever, the Mobile Web BP document seem to assume
that content developers will be falling over each other in the rush to
adopt it. That's understandable in a sector that's in a bubble but
some common sense justification is needed there too and the MWI would
do well to address the issue in another document. The MWBP limits
itself to saying "improve the user experience of the Web", avoiding
cost-benefit considerations.

So I think that the text is correct, but I take the point that the
document should avoid arguing for one thing or the other and just
state the technical facts.

cheers,

Alan



On 29/10/2007, Sullivan, Bryan <BS3131@att.com> wrote:
>
> I agree that a "business case" itself or how to build one should not be addressed in MWBP guidelines. However clarifying the value of accessibility is useful (the generic "value proposition"), as a way for people to understand why they should read the document, and why W3C is working on it.
>
> Best regards,
> Bryan Sullivan | AT&T | Service Standards
> bryan.sullivan@att.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-bpwg-access-request@w3.org [mailto:public-bpwg-access-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Charles McCathieNevile
> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 11:40 AM
> To: Alan Chuter; EOWG; Mobile Web Accessibility Task Force
> Subject: Business cases Re: Summary of last weeks discussion...
>
>
> On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 09:01:08 -0400, Alan Chuter <achuter@technosite.es>
> wrote:
>
> > I'm updating the document with some of the points discussed (not all
> > due to lack of time today) but it won't be online for a few days so
> > here are the changes I've made.
> ...
> >> Include the term "business case" as that is largely what the document
> >> is about, not just technical feasibility.
> > "It attempts to provide a basis for building the business case for
> > adopting either the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 or the
> > Mobile Web Best Practices in a web site that already complies with
> > one. For accessibility, the Web Accessibility Initiative provides a
> > guidance document Developing a Web Accessibility Business Case for
> > Your Organization."
>
> I disagree that this document is intended to provide the business case, and do not support it doing so. The document we need is one that describes how much of one specification is met already if you have met the other (and therefore what remains). A business case document might be the province of the WAI EOWG, but not the MWBP or its Task Forces.
>
>
> ...
>
> cheers
>
> Chaals
>
> --
> Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
>      je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
> http://my.opera.com/chaals              Try the Kestrel - Opera 9.5 alpha
>
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 30 October 2007 10:41:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:10:32 GMT