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

Fw: Building a business case for web accessibility

From: Laux <laux@mho.net>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001 18:51:05 -0600
Message-ID: <00e701c121ff$ea9820a0$9d2e9dd0@uswc.uswest.com>
To: "EOWG" <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Bohman" <paulb@cpd2.usu.edu>
To: <sec508@trace.wisc.edu>
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 3:24 PM
Subject: Re: Building a business case for web accessibility


> Adam, you have provided us with some useful insight, although, as was
> pointed out, this represents the cost of implementing a completely new
> process. The up-front development time and learning curve are undeniably
> part of the cost, but you can't easily predict the future costs based upon
> the up-front costs alone.
>
> In my own development, I have been developing with accessibility in mind
for
> at least a couple of years now, and it is impossible for me to put a
> percentage or price tag on the difference between an inaccessible design
and
> an accessible design, because all of my designs are meant to be
accessible.
> I don't add on anything to the process at this point, because
accessibility
> _IS_ my process. When a company reaches this point, then there is almost
no
> point in asking a question like this. I would venture a guess
> (non-scientific, but an educated guess), that a company which always
designs
> accessibly will likely recover any and all additional development costs by
> virtue of being able to serve and attract a compensatory number of clients
> with disabilities.
>
> A very important point to underscore is that accessibility is not an
add-on
> to the process. You don't design something and then at the end try to
> determine whether or not is accessible. By the time the developers get
that
> far, it's already too late.
>
> Accessibility is implemented at every stage of the game. If the designers
> are thinking in terms of accessibility from the beginning, it really
doesn't
> take "extra" time to tack-on accessibility, because the process is so
> intertwined with all of the other aspects of design. In fact, you're not
> "tacking on" anything at all. You are simply creating the desired result,
> which (oh, by the way) is accessible.
>
> That's the shift that has to occur. Once it does, then Glenda's question
> will be a thing of the past. It's like asking how much extra does it cost
a
> company to make things work in both Netscape and Internet Explorer. No one
> asks this question anymore, because everyone knows that they just have to
do
> it, and it's a part of the process.
>
> Paul Bohman
> Technology Coordinator
> WebAIM (Web Accessibility in Mind)
> www.webaim.org
> Utah State University
> www.usu.edu
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Roades, Adam" <ARoades@anteon.com>
> To: <sec508@trace.wisc.edu>
> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 1:50 PM
> Subject: RE: Building a business case for web accessibility
>
>
> > As a contractor for the federal government, we have been discussing how
> our
> > "metrics" are affected by section 508.  What we've found - mostly from
> > experience in designing/developing the 508 Universe and training for
GSA -
> > is that our total costs increased 25% of the total project cost
(compared
> to
> > not considering accessibility issues).
> >
> > Most of this increase was due to quality control cycles that
incorporated
> a
> > new level of complexity. We tested the site for 508 compliancy using
> > different AT - such as JAWS and Home Page Reader - that were identified
by
> > the client as representative of the audience's needs.  In the future, we
> > hope this cost will decrease as we reuse templates that are considered
> > compliant, use a formal quality control process for accessibility, and
use
> > previously identified resources to test pages.  Of course, as we
> experiment
> > with different designs in an effort to create new templates, this
increase
> > cost will need to be considered.  And as new technologies are developed,
> > we'll need to consider incorporating them into the quality control
> process,
> > possibly lengthening it further.
> >
> > Adam Roades
> > Instructional Designer
> > Anteon Corporation
> >
> > Web: http://www.anteon.com
> > email: aroades@anteon.com
> >
> >  -----Original Message-----
> > From: Glenda Watson Hyatt [mailto:Glenda@eaglecom.bc.ca]
> > Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 2:43 PM
> > To: Webwatch; WebAIM accessibility forum; Sec508@Trace. Wisc. Edu;
> > Disacc@Yahoogroups. Com
> > Subject: Building a business case for web accessibility
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Please pardon this cross-posting.  I'm seeking some information and need
> to
> > cast my net as widely as possible.
> >
> > I am attempting to build a business case for web accessibility and am
look
> > for actual dollar costs [or percentage of total cost] of making sites
> > accessible, both new and existing sites.  We all know the legal
> > ramifications, but has any research been done into the actual cost to
> > business?  I'd appreciate any and all leads to information.  And, as
> usual,
> > time is a factor here.  Thanks.
> >
> > Looking forward to hearing from you.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Glenda
> >
> > *********
> > Glenda Watson Hyatt
> > Soaring Eagle Communications
> > "Creating freedom and power through accessible communications"
> > E Mail: mailto:Glenda@eaglecom.bc.ca
> > Website: http://www.eaglecom.bc.ca
> > Want to know how to make your website accessible to more people?
> > Subscribe to our FREE newsletter by emailing
> > mailto:newsletter@eaglecom.bc.ca
> >
> > *********
> >
>
>
Received on Friday, 10 August 2001 20:51:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 10:33:31 GMT