W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > July to September 2001

Re: Considerations for Specific Contexts, from Evaluating Web Sites...

From: <Andrew.Arch@visionaustralia.org.au>
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2001 08:47:52 +1000
To: Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>
Cc: EOWG <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OFE9B00A99.1D3A1291-ONCA256A9A.007B9C9E@domino.bigpond.com>


I think all three sections are essential as they address different phase of
a site's life-cycle and/or history. However, section 4 is not the main
purpose of this document, so the level of detail is probably about right.
As William says, the 'public' review will bring in more comments any. in
the meantime here are a few suggestions from me:


"Evaluation during the development process is essential to reduce the
reworking that may be required after the project is completed. Working
closely with the Web developers can ensure that accessiility is built into
the design from the start and carries through into all the development
phases. Effective evaluation during the deisgn phase can include:"


Point 5 - do we want to insit on a separate (email I preume) address for
accessibilioty feedback, or just include accessibilty as one type of
feedback among many?


Point 3 - let add priorities to resource and timelines

Cheers,  Andrew

                    Judy Brewer                                                             
                    <jbrewer@w3.org        To:     EOWG <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>                 
                    >                      cc:                                              
                    Sent by:               Subject:     Considerations for Specific         
                    w3c-wai-eo-requ        Contexts, from Evaluating Web   Sites...         
                    28/07/01 07:45                                                          


For discussion on the list, since we did not get to discuss in
teleconference today:

Please review section on "Considerations for specific contexts" which
- Evaluation during the development process
- Ongoing monitoring
- Evaluation of "frozen" sites

Starter questions:

- first piece of intro (development process) seems too wordy, can it be cut

- are the points listed in each of the three sub-sections relevant and

- is the section on ongoing monitoring adequate for ensuring the really
tough goal listed up in the overall introduction to this piece, e.g.
providing assurance that a site will maintain a given conformance level in
the future (note that I added a pointer from that goal down to this

- is the section on frozen sites significant, or should it be thrown out?

- other comments?


Judy Brewer    jbrewer@w3.org    +1.617.258.9741    http://www.w3.org/WAI
Director, Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) International Program Office
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
MIT/LCS Room NE43-355, 200 Technology Square, Cambridge, MA,  02139,  USA
Received on Tuesday, 31 July 2001 18:50:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:55:48 UTC