W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > wai-eo-editors@w3.org > August 2011

Updating Policies -- initial thoughts

From: Jennifer Sutton <jsuttondc@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2011 11:13:29 -0700
Message-Id: <>
To: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>,Liam McGee <liam.mcgee@communis.co.uk>, Sylvie duchateau <sylvie.duchateau@snv.jussieu.fr>, Denis Boudreau <dboudreau@accessibiliteweb.com>, Andrew Arch <Andrew.Arch@finance.gov.au>, Helle_BjarnÝ <jor@servicestyrelsen.dk>
Cc: <wai-eo-editors@w3.org>

>I'm forwarding the following message to WAI EO 
>Editors so we have a record of discussion.


>Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2011 00:43:07 -0700
>To: Shawn_Henry, Sylvie_duchateau, Liam_McGee, 
>Helle_BjarnÝ, Denis_Boudreau, Arch_Andrew
>From: Jennifer Sutton <jsuttondc@gmail.com>
>Subject: Updating Policies -- initial thoughts
>Shawn, Sylvie, Denis, Andrew, Liam, and Helle:

>I think I have included all of those who were 
>interested in discussing updating the policies 
>document. If I've missed someone, or I've 
>included you by mistake, please let me know.
>Shawn, if you want to capture any of this into 
>the changelog, of course, feel free.
>I have ONE request/action:
>If it's easy, can you update the page-title of 
>the Draft Policies document so that when I 
>alt-tab among pages, I'll be sure when I'm in 
>the draft?  Thanks in advance. I mean this: 
>I've spent a while poking around the site. Here 
>are my initial thoughts, but we likely won't 
>need to discuss all of this. What Shawn has in 
>the changelog addresses the big picture, so we should focus on that.
>1. I ran a link-check on the document; here's a 
>link to the results, though nobody should spend 
>time working through it until I take a first pass, I think. See:
>2.  I agree that the introduction needs to be 
>shortened, and I'll take a stab at it as soon as I can.
>Is the intro the right place to mention the harmonization document?
>3. I am thinking that we should update what we 
>have, and then, for the second batch of updates, 
>I can focus on finding any new countries. Does 
>anyone know, right off, if there are any?
>4.  Is it necessary to indicate where a document 
>was formerly located? I'm persuadable, but I 
>find the link references that are not "live" 
>slow my skimming and comprehension.
>Might it be easier to maintain if the current 
>page were simply archived and linked to at the bottom?
>W3C might care about what was updated and what 
>used to be where, but I'm not sure the 
>updates/changes need to be flagged for the general reader.
>In addition, I'm afraid that this kind of 
>flagging may highlight the maintenance issues.
>If I'm coming to this page, I'm going to look 
>for my country, or another country that 
>interests me, and find the links for that as 
>quickly as I can. I'm envisioning someone who 
>may come to this page from the "Contacting 
>Organizations about Inaccessible Web Sites" 
>page. If I were that person, I'd want the two or 
>three links I should be citing in my email.
>I worry about overwhelming people with two many choices.
>5. Should there be a new category that relates 
>to Global efforts such as the UN Convention? Or ITU may have something(s)?
>6. Is it worth considering either eliminating, 
>or lessening, the "Additional Information" sections?
>Or maybe, when soliciting updates, we indicate 
>that people only may include three links at the VERY most?
>I'm thinking about future maintenance and too many choices.
>7. When possible, if there are only certain 
>sections in a document, I'd like to try to "deep 
>link" right to them, using a nested list. I know 
>this runs contrary to my generally wanting to 
>simplify, but I find it hard to see textual 
>citations and then have to shift among pages as 
>I try to locate them in the legal document. I suspect I'm not alone.
>But of course, people probably often don't 
>construct the documents to make deep-linking easy.
>8. I doubt that we will want to update the 
>United States states page right away. It's here: 
>But if you want to document in the changelog, 
>Shawn, I happen to have these three links for MN handy:
>Chapter 131 - Revisor of Statutes
>MN Accessibility Initiative:
>MN Standards Accessibility:
>And for IL:
>Illinois Information Technology Accessibility 
>Act http://www.msfw.com/accessibility/highlights/iitaa.aspx
>Here are additional references I've bookmarked so far:
>Current document:
>Draft with some guidance (search for < -- the 
>less-than sign): http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/policy-updates
>Laura Carlson's Web Reference -- has mostly 
>English-speaking countries -- US, UK, and 
Received on Monday, 1 August 2011 18:18:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:25:22 UTC