W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > October to December 2003

Investment Considerations

From: Carol at Kognitive.com <carol@kognitive.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 00:54:56 -0600
Message-ID: <0b0301c39f7b$e672c1a0$7900a8c0@VAIO>
To: <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
Hello all,

Here's my input (pushing the deadline a bit, so since other's beat me to it I'm going to build on what Sailesh and Elizabeth have added to the conversation.  Where i agree with their comments I included the changes.

The changes I've made are marked "strong" in the attached HTML and are listed below for your reference.

1.  Replaced the word "Investment" with "cost" where seemed appropriate (Sailesh's rec.) - 2 locations.  Changed "Potential Initial Capital Expenditures" section by taking the word "capital" out of title.

2.  1st paragraph - added "in new projects" and changed the word "small" to "insignificant" (Sailesh's rec.).

3.  1st paragraph - changed 2nd sentence slightly incorporating Sailesh's ideas.

4.  Added paragraph that Sailesh recommended with some slight alterations.

Initial Investment

5. Replaced 2nd sentence in first paragraph with a slightly altered version of Elizabeth's suggestion.

6. 2nd full paragraph - shortened first sentence and broke into two.

Potential initial capital expenditures

7. Added wording of "development" per Elizabeth's suggestion.

8.  Attempted to fix passive voice - though I don't think it helped.

9.  Paragraph 2 - changed wording on first sentence.

9.  Paragraph 2 - Added Elizabeth's recommendation to end of paragraph.  Though I think the last sentence needs some work - I'm not sure what to do.  I think it can be simplified.

On-going Human Resources Cost

10. First paragraph - Sentence added with example.


Additionally, Sailesh I think makes some great points - about organizations prioritizing what to change first on a website and considering different levels of accessibility.  Also, the comments that it costs less to design and develop a website with accessiblity in mind and reasons for inaccessible content would be great to include - I'm just not sure where or if they belong in this section.

We discussed NOT having additional off-page resources - and I agree.  But I do like the idea of listing cost considerations and I don't think they belong on this page.  I think it would be nice to offer a "check-list" of sorts for people to be able to accurately budget for an "upgrade" to accessibility.

Carol J. Smith
Kognitive Consulting
Chicago, IL, USA
Cell: 773-218-6568
carol@kognitive.com
 
Received on Friday, 31 October 2003 01:55:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 10:33:36 GMT