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

Re: WCAG 2.0 and JAWS

From: Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net>
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2012 14:38:15 -0400 (EDT)
To: accessys@smart.net
cc: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>, Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@whatsock.com>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.64.1207281435280.30008@server1.shellworld.net>
That is because we have yet to make it cool to be accessible, yet to 
market it as cool I mean.
Easily done, lord what a disturbing thing for anyone to say.
My understanding is that some arms of disability studies take the approach 
that *everyone* has a disability under certain circumstances.  remove or 
alter the circumstance and the disability experience goes away.
Karen

On Sat, 28 Jul 2012, accessys@smart.net wrote:

>
>
> all good points, and I've actually heard PR folks veto accessibility because 
> "it is not the image we wish to project"
>
> Bob
>
>
> On Sat, 28 Jul 2012, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>
>>  Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2012 14:17:59 -0400 (EDT)
>>  From: Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net>
>>  To: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
>>  Cc: Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@whatsock.com>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
>>  Subject: Re: WCAG 2.0 and JAWS
>>  Resent-Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2012 18:18:24 +0000
>>  Resent-From: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
>>
>>  David is in my view straight on here.
>>  When decisions are made the question is first asked, what will we gain?
>>  That may mean how much profit, how much pr etc.
>>  The marketing people are not getting the numbers that reflect how
>>  beneficial on  many levels access is.
>>  Given the vast academic outfits involved, I am frankly surprised someone
>>  has not done this by now.
>>  The sort of market research that demonstrates how much  individuals
>>  experiencing disabilities actually put into the economy sort of research.
>>  My guess has always been that the research is not done because of the
>>  typical focus, be accessible because the law requires it, or because it is
>>  the kind thing to do...not because you tap into revenue that way.
>>
>>  The engineers may want to do it, because making things accessible can be
>>  fun if presented like that.
>>  the marketing department may veto it though because they think it plays to
>>  a knish with no benefit resulting.
>>  Again its these sorts of people who should learn more about the positive
>>  aspects of access.
>>
>>  Karen
>>
>>  On Sat, 28 Jul 2012, David Woolley wrote:
>> 
>> >  Bryan Garaventa wrote:
>> > > 
>> > >   The only way to implement true web accessibility in the future is to
>> > >   involve
>> > >   engineers at the corporate, organizational, and academic levels.
>> > >   Otherwise,
>> > >   more and more policies will be created, and relatively few will have 
>> > >  the
>> > >   knowledge or desire to understand them.
>> > > 
>> > 
>> >  In my view, the failure is much more likely to arise from marketing 
>> >  people than engineers.  Whilst most engineers may not realise, even 
>> >  those who do, and may even raise an issue report, are likely to get 
>> >  overruled by marketing. Some may self censor, because they know they 
>> >  will be rejected, and most may just have learned to think like marketing 
>> >  people as the best way of being appreciated in the organisation.
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> 
>
>
>
Received on Saturday, 28 July 2012 18:38:38 UTC

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