W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > wai-eo-editors@w3.org > May 2009

Re: minor comments on Business Case document

From: Andrew Arch <andrew@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 21:51:07 +0100
Message-ID: <4A204ABB.3000201@w3.org>
To: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>
CC: wai-eo-editors <wai-eo-editors@w3.org>
Thanks Shadi - see inline below:

Shadi Abou-Zahra wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
> 
> First of all, thank you for addressing my previous comments. I think 
> these changes are great.
> 
> Please find below some additional minor comments on the Business Case 
> for your consideration:
> 
> ## Overview
> - validation error (simple ID name mismatch)

Validated for me :)

> - s/The Web is increasingly an essential resource many aspects of 
> life/The Web is increasingly an essential resource in many aspects of 
> life (typo - forgot "in")

Done - but used 'for' rather than 'in'

> - consider a different word for "recoup" (not very common word)

Retained for now - 'recoup' is a common EN business term. I considered 
'recover' but subtly different and broader.

> - s/so too do their business cases/so do their business cases

Retained for now - it was LisaP's editorial suggestion which I think 
adds emphasis to the differences that arise. If SLH & SAZ insisit I 
_could_ accept changing this.

> ## Social Factors
> - s/including older people with age-related impairments/including people 
> with age-related functional limitations ("impairment" unnecessary here)

Was 'Done' - retained after EO discussion
http://www.w3.org/2009/05/29-eo-minutes.html#item02

> - s/To estimate how many people are affected by Web accessibility is 
> difficult/It is difficult to estimate how many people are affected by 
> Web accessibility (I personally think it is easier to read this way)

Trying "Estimating how many people are affected by Web accessibility is
difficult because ..."

> - s/Overlap with Design for Older Users/Overlap with Older Users Needs

Done - based on follow-up emails where Shadi said "Don't want to reduce 
Web accessibility requirements to design alone. A lot of our findings 
relate to tools and services being inaccessible."

> - consider "vision/hearing/physical/cognitive decline" rather than the 
> term "impairment" in the bullets of "Overlap with Design for Older 
> Users" (reduce use of the term (label) "impairment" where possible)

Done - but after EO discussion should impairment be retained?
http://www.w3.org/2009/05/29-eo-minutes.html#item02

> - s/The accessibility provisions that make the Web accessible provide 
> many benefits for people experiencing impairments due to the ageing 
> process/The accessibility provisions that make the Web accessible 
> provide many benefits for people experiencing impairments due to the 
> ageing process, even though they may not be regarded as having a 
> disability (we first say that "people with disabilities includes older 
> people with functional decline", then we say that "accessibility also 
> benefits people without disabilities including older people" -- trying 
> to qualify it here, and make the relationships very clear)

Done - good suggestion

> - s/Older people with age-related visual deterioration benefit 
> from/Older people with visual decline benefit from
> - s/Older people with diminished fine motor control benefit from/Older 
> people with reduced fine motor control benefit from
> - s/Older people with hearing loss benefit from/Older people with 
> hearing decline benefit from

Done somewhat:
  - visual deterioration > deteriorating vision
  - diminished fine motor control > reduced dexterity
  - 'hearing loss' retained

> - consider adding something about cognitive disabilities in sub-section 
> "Access for Older People", even if you just deffer to the "Access for 
> People with Low Literacy and People Not Fluent in the Language" which 
> has the relevant Success Criteria and Checkpoint mappings

Done

> ## Financial Factors
> - validation error (simple ID name mismatch)

Validated for me :)

> - s/Testing design ideas and early prototypes with users with 
> disabilities and older users, and including assistive 
> technologies/Testing design ideas and early prototypes with users with 
> disabilities and older users, and with assistive technologies

Done

Happy to discuss any of the above.

Cheers, Andrew

> Regards,
>   Shadi
> 
Received on Friday, 29 May 2009 20:51:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 12 January 2010 00:13:18 GMT