W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: initial EOWG feedback on methodology naming

From: Robert Yonaitis <ryonaitis@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 09:43:25 -0400
Message-ID: <CAD_6MyOPVrFrtipL8vZYne24tKnSqVBW7bBoJTK2=6TU3XVCRg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>
Cc: Eval TF <public-wai-evaltf@w3.org>, EOWG <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
Shadi,

While it is true that web properties (albeit virtual) do provide
information they also provide structure, applications and other
rich/interactive content. It should be noted that some or all of this
may or may not be informative. I also think it is pretty clear, out in
the market place, that there should be no assumption as to where or
how your website may be utilized - even if you automatically direct to
different web based applications.

I also think that website already means what you are suggesting and it
is clear. From the perspective of drilling down of course we can have
more detail. Certain things remain true to an application designer or
software engineer regardless of the platform. When we think of the
web, hosted applications and the marketing term Cloud  we are still
talking about a site or location in that cloud. So, if we want to
evaluate a site; both presentation and application level etc we are
still talking about a location (site).

Years ago  I discussed the language of Section 508 with the govt and
we specifically discussed audience. What was covered was the clarity
of the technical language and how engineers or developers (not quite
the same so I added some clarity) would understand the same.

Perhaps leaving the word website, as it is understood, and instead
modifying the methodology into sections designed for different
audiences makes more sense? This sounds like an interesting task
force.

Cheers,
Rob Yonaitis


On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 9:22 AM, Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org> wrote:
> Dear Eval TF,
>
> Last Friday the Education and Outreach Working Group (EOWG) spend some time
> brainstorming potential ideas for naming the Methodology:
>  - <http://www.w3.org/2011/10/21-eo-minutes#item02>
>
>
> One particularly interesting idea was potential use of "web information
> system" or "web-based information system" as opposed to "website". This
> helps overcome the inclarity that "websites" includes web applications,
> mobile sites, intranets, and other types of web-based systems. What do
> people think of the term "web information system" in place of "website"?
>
>
> This term also lends itself to new sets of title and acronyms. Examples
> raised include:
>  - Web-Based Information System Accessibility Evaluation (WISE)
>  - Web-Based Information System Accessibility Conformance Evaluation (WISE)
>  - Web-Based Information System Accessibility Conformance Evaluation
> Methodology (WISACEM)
>
>
> Other random brainstorm ideas from EOWG included:
>  - Website Accessibility Conformance Evaluation Methodology (WACEM)
>  - Website Accessibility Review Evaluation (aWARE)
>  - Website Accessibility Review (aWARe)
>  - Evaluation Quality Accessibility (EQuAl)
>  - Accessibility Quality Assurance (AQuA)
>  - Quality Accessibility Check (QAC)
>
>
> Any thoughts or reactions to these brainstorms is welcome too.
>
> Best,
>  Shadi
>
> --
> Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/
> Activity Lead, W3C/WAI International Program Office
> Evaluation and Repair Tools Working Group (ERT WG)
> Research and Development Working Group (RDWG)
>
>



-- 
Rob Yonaitis
http://www.yonaitis.com/ | http://twitter.com/ryonaitis
Received on Wednesday, 26 October 2011 13:43:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 10:33:58 GMT