W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2004

RE: Who needs what Re: A Call to Reorganize WCAG 2.0

From: John M Slatin <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 15:23:39 -0500
Message-ID: <C46A1118E0262B47BD5C202DA2490D1A0331809B@MAIL02.austin.utexas.edu>
To: "RUST Randal" <RRust@COVANSYS.com>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>

Randal RUST  wrote:
<blockquote>
> (How do you validate accessibility if you can only measure usability?)

We don't measure usability. It's always in the original project plan,
and it gets tossed out as soon as the project budget gets crunched. The
same with accessibility. Would you like to know how most clients have us
validate accessibility? If we are using Dreamweaver and templates, then
we validate the templates with BOBBY. If the templates pass, then we're
good to go. There is not content within the templates, but the client
doesn't care. They aren't about to spend the time to check every single
page, in every possible state, for accessibility or usability.

</blockquote>

The fact that some (maybe even most) clients "don't care" and "aren't
about to take the time" to do serious accessibility evaluation is not an
argument against writing the best guidelines we can possibly write to
provide the best guidance we can think of for those developers and
clients who who *do* care and do want to know how best to meet the needs
of a diverse audience.

It *is* an argument to produce the best accessibility evaluation tools
we can, and to train people as best we can to evaluate accessibility
using both the tools and informed judgment. And for doing what we can to
persuade clients that these are important issues to which they should
commit resources, whether for legal, ethical, or financial reasons.
Received on Tuesday, 24 August 2004 20:23:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 23:39:44 UTC