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

RE: Financial factors- Investment Considerations

From: Shawn Lawton Henry <shawn@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 19:10:12 -0600
To: "'Sailesh Panchang'" <sailesh.panchang@deque.com>, "EOWG (E-mail)" <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000001c3a402$bad90320$08827544@SLHenry>
1.  Replace "investment" with  "cost" in this section. Also avoid the
term "capital". 
 
SLH:
I changed the section title from "investment considerations" to "cost
considerations"
Do you think we need to change "Potential initial capital expenditures
include:" as a heading for evaluation tools, AT, and upgrades (as
opposed to human resources costs - which is mostly just a way to group a
long list)?
 
2. Consider following introduction for this section of the doc:
"It is important for an organization to recognize that    making Web
content accessible is not a one time effort and expense but needs long
term commitment as    Web content and Web applications  undergo changes
and revisions over time. Besides  monetary costs, an organization needs
to   be prepared to  invest the extra time needed for the effort
especially during the initial stages, and also overcome  any  resistance
to  changing content development and deployment processes. "
 
SLH: Tried to get some of the ideas in there, without going into too
much detail or drifting out of scope. We have training and maintenance,
and a bit about ongoing costs. Does that cover it?

 
3. "The cost of including accessibility is usually a small percentage of
the overall Web site development cost."

 
SLH: changed to "When accessibility is incorporated from the beginning
of Web site development it is often a small percentage of the overall
Web site cost."
 
4. Strongly feel that repeating "leads to cost savings later on" is not
necessary in this section. The argument about someone going straight to
this section can be made about any other section, so do they warrant
similar inclusion of content  from other sections?

 
SLH: took them out
 
5. Consider replacing "costs are early investments at an
organization level..." by saying :
"Very little or nothing needs to be done to make an individual project
accessible   once the process of authoring(or building) accessible
content  has been internalized at the organizational level."

 
SLH: edited
 
6.  Consider listing  costs (non exhaustive):

 
SLH: put them in <DL>


- Obtaining certification   that Web content is accessible

 
SLH: I'm very hesitant to put this in. primarily because it's not a
required cost of accessibility. also because i want to be careful that
it doesn't look like WAI is endorsing certification. if you think it
should be in there, we shoud talk about it in EOWG
 
7. The following  content also needs to be  introduced into this section
- preferably after listing the  above cost elements.
 
"Some of these costs  might be incurred more frequently  than others. An
organization might choose to outsource some  or all of the processes
which will then  require retaining consultants well versed in
accessibility design and testing or firms that provide such services.
Another organization might choose to  build the capability inhouse by
equipping itself with the necessary tools,  software and staff. The
costs also depend on the approach   adopted for implementing  Web
accessibility. some organizations prefer to assign priorities to various
types of Web content. One possible classification of Web content is:
- Content  that is important  from the organization's perspective. For
example, a business might like to make its products and service offering
pages  accessible before  working on  pages that contains  content of
interest to investors or job seekers. Another organization might reverse
the order. An organization running a passenger   bus / rail network
might consider making its schedules accessible first.
- Web applications- secure and non-secure
- multi-media Web content that  might need  extra effort for providing
text alternative content / transcriptions / captions. 
- static versus dynamic Web content
The level of accessibility  sought to be attained  may also influence
the process and therefore the costs. It is possible for instance, that
the efforts and time required for an organization to attain a mandated
accessibility level (if any), that is lower than the   one recommended
as the most desirable by the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, might
be lower.
Just like itt is more economical and easier to     plan and incorporate
accessibility  into a physical structure like a new building than an
existing one, it is  more easier on all counts to      make a new
Website  accessible  than retrofitting  an existing website for
accessibility features. In other words, it costs less to designed and
develop a website with   accessibility in mind.   "
 
SLH: I wonder if this is too detailed? Let's discuss in EOWG...
 
8. We need to  briefly state why websites are inaccessible... in
Financial Factors page or Overview page. It will help put things in
perspective.
 
 
SLH: I think that is out of the scope of this document - yet very
interesting - and I'm not sure where it fits in other WAI resources.
 
Received on Wednesday, 5 November 2003 20:10:55 GMT

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