W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2012

(unknown charset) Re: WCAG 2.0 and JAWS

From: (unknown charset) Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net>
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2012 01:36:25 -0400 (EDT)
To: (unknown charset) "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>
cc: (unknown charset) w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.64.1207271623210.87965@server1.shellworld.net>
Patrick, and all.
Finally a moment for this.
In context below...

On Tue, 24 Jul 2012, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:



>
> Who are you blaming here. "The W3C"? It is all of our shared responsibility 
> to educate the general public.

Granted blame is a far stronger word than fits my posting.  I asked a 
still unanswered question.  Still, just who do you believe is the "general 
public" on the Internet?


  Do you feel that small businesses in your area 
> know nothing about accessibility? Well, go on and educate them. Start local 
> groups with your peers.

Patrick, there is no *local* or *area* where the Internet is concerned.  I 
am  surprised at your comment given the context.
Likewise as I just shared in a prior post, there are no peers either.  All 
of us can find 
that we require access suddenly, and each individual is going to, as they 
should, define what that access means for them.
If anything perhaps generalizing only seasons the confusion.


>
> "Those in political arena are being told" by whom? Are you suggesting "The 
> W3C" is going out to politicians telling them about WCAG? Well, that's not 
> the case.

That is far from what I said as well.
Still lets be honest.
I feel very sure that those on this list and the w3c do not generate these 
standards for fun.  I am almost certain that people do not travel to these 
meetings and take part on this committees for the genius or Budweiser 
either for that matter.
You work as hard as you do in order to create uniform  standards that you 
want to see  implemented...and so they are.
The work of the w3c gets written into legal jurisprudence, becomes 
the heart of, if not the foundation of   federal Provencal and state 
guidelines.
People direct others to your door as a way of explaining what is often 
beyond them to explain.  People use your work to often cover for the work 
they cannot do themselves.
They do it because of your reputation...and your reach.
I still smile when I come across someone calling the w3 c the Internet 
police,  for many, no matter how unrealistic, you are seen that way.
Court decisions henge on how someone has or has not used your standards, 
and rather a few in the rank and file have heard of you as well.
It is unrealistic for those here to think your effort sits in some 
academic tower.  It impacts lives, millions of them.
As a result my question was how you insure some basic understanding of 
that work via public relations outside of those you feel are in the choir.
Site creators are very often folks who are running their business and 
taking a web design  package off a shelf, but wanting to reach people 
around the globe.   They learn, after they fail to 
allow access that they are  in need of more information, but haven't a 
clue what a java target is etc.
They start asking the same sort of questions that began this thread, 
because they well do what many often do  on this list, find an individual 
ask what they use and fail to make the distinctions needful for real 
access across the board.

My point Patrick is that this work does not exist in a vacuum, so i 
wondered how the w3c already lets the air in so to speak...if they do that is.


>
> So, there's "a tool" that fails? Are you suggesting "The W3C" should go out 
> after the tool maker? Again, it is our shared responsibility to call out tool 
> manufacturers and charlatans in our industry that promise solutions that 
> don't deliver.
>

Honestly?  again I ask who "our shared" refers to.  Also, if the w3c 
creates the standards, they have an important mandate to insure those 
standards are understood as widely as they wish them to be implemented. 
The reality is the the Internet is far from the size of our neighborhood 
anymore.  A lack of standards application can  prevent a person from 
accessing a site that lives on another Continent depending on on the 
business involved.  Via broad public relations, you can at least limit the 
ability of someone to do the sort of damage the tool I referenced does. 
If memory serves that program got a write up in the New York Times of all 
places.  There may already be a strong objective general media effort 
done by the w3c, if there is none, clearly there should be.  Not just 
because your work deserves correct implementation, but because the end 
user is only expert on one thing, how they individually  desire access to 
be defined, for them.
Frankly that is why the focus on end user agents, instead of foundations 
that when tested with very general things insure universal door, has 
me worried.  There are many many tools and as man way to use them as 
humans behind the need to use them.  And of course, each time a user agent 
changes, the end user must struggle to start all over again in many cases.




>
> Because you seem to think there's a uniform group at work here ("The W3C"?). 
> There isn't.

Indeed? then why are those interested in access directed to a variation 
of
www.w3c.org
in order to find documentation and information regarding the wcag 2.0 
then?
Yes there are people behind that label, but your standards and work are 
represented as a part of that whole.


We're all people who are interested in accessibility. Do you 
> feel there's little effort? Start an effort! Don't just sit back and ask why 
> nobody's doing anything about it ;)

Patrick, that was not what I asked.
I asked if there is a uniform public relations effort to accompany the 
uniform standards creation effort.
What illustrated the need for this of course was the likely well intended, 
but profoundly misinformed question about the wcag and jaws...a state of 
misinformation that is far more  common than unusual.
That such questions can still be asked suggests that the w3c may not be, 
or and I stress this, not to my knowledge matching standards with 
external media relations.
As for starting my own movement, I am not sure why you feel I have not in 
a way?
I think I have said on the few times I have posted here that I am a media 
professional, not a...hmmm w3c content creating professional smiles.
My job is to notice where an audience is not getting the message.
Your very writing a if there is a general public different from the other who 
benefits from access illustrates my point.  There is no us verses them 
here, no  community save the human one who shares in the Internet as a whole.
Realize it or not, but rather a few see the w3c as the source for building 
rules on that super highway.  Such is why your word on access is taken so 
seriously. 
Many many many have no idea how to articulate what they should experience, 
and many many many more cannot understand what access means because they 
do not get much of a chance because many are focused on that us 
verses them...instead of, here is the common experience.
Personally I end up asking for access as it applies to me, that by the 
way is all any individual can do.
But that does not mean I am sitting back so to speak.
One of the things I do as a  journalist via a common ground media umbrella 
associated with a nonprofit organization I have produced content for going 
on 20 years now is   encourage guide and even take care of the sort of 
media I feel should be happening.
I do it as a consultant,  and I do it via the organization.
Anyone wants to ask about  this, write me off list.  I  do not think I can 
hang a shingle out here.
We are also always looking for international board-members, nice thing 
about being tax exempt is you can say thanks around tax day with 
deductions.

But...my original question was if the w3c has a pr arm equal to the 
standards creating one to help curb the sort of assumptions that started 
this thread in the first place?

Thanks,
Karen Lewellen
www.karenlewellen.com/services.htm
www.karenlewellen.com/samples.htm



  >
> P
> -- 
> Patrick H. Lauke
> ______________________________________________________________
> re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
> [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
>
> www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
> http://redux.deviantart.com | http://flickr.com/photos/redux/
> ______________________________________________________________
> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
> ______________________________________________________________
>
>
Received on Saturday, 28 July 2012 05:36:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:13:30 UTC