- From: Lisa Seeman <lisa1seeman@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2021 19:08:22 +0200
- To: Steve Lee <stevelee@w3.org>
- Cc: Abi James <A.James@soton.ac.uk>, "E.A. Draffan" <ead@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, Rachael Montgomery <rachael@accessiblecommunity.org>, "public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org" <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAKExBM+yaycbsn5FK4+dOaQcAAENivNnoRZx0Tw1XuWu69jM7w@mail.gmail.com>
How about * Organizational Considerations and Policies * BTW....The original heading for appendix b was: Considerations for Uptake in Different Contexts and Policies. That is ok as well The links to the section is: considerations-for-uptake-in-different-contexts-and-policies <https://www.w3.org/TR/coga-usable/#appendix-considerations-for-uptake-in-different-contexts-and-policies> On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 1:59 PM Steve Lee <stevelee@w3.org> wrote: > +1 to organisational > > On 07/01/2021 11:09, Abi James wrote: > > +1 to merging. I would support replacing “business” with organisational > > or strategic so that it included not for profits and public sector. > > > > Regards > > > > Abi > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > >> On 7 Jan 2021, at 10:36, E.A. Draffan <ead@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> +1 from me as well, although I often wonder if the word ‘business’ > >> puts off some organisations looking at the content. > >> > >> Best wishes > >> > >> E.A. > >> > >> *From:*Rachael Montgomery <rachael@accessiblecommunity.org> > >> *Sent:* 07 January 2021 10:32 > >> *To:* public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org; Steve Lee <stevelee@w3.org> > >> *Subject:* Re: merging appendix c and b > >> > >> *CAUTION:*This e-mail originated outside the University of Southampton. > >> > >> I too support reducing the number of appendices. I prefer Steve’s > >> suggested title. > >> > >> On Jan 7, 2021, 5:22 AM -0500, Steve Lee <stevelee@w3.org > >> <mailto:stevelee@w3.org>>, wrote: > >> > >> On 06/01/2021 09:44, Lisa Seeman wrote: > >> > >> Is there any objection to merging appendix c ( business > >> consideration) > >> to appendix b (making a policy)? > >> > >> > >> > >> I think it is a benefit to readers to have fewer Appendices and so a > >> shorter less complex document. I also think whilst undoubtedly > >> important > >> topics they *are* in the Appendices and both of interest to very > >> similar > >> secondary audiences for the document. > >> > >> According to another email to the list it seems the thinking is that > >> this merged Appendix will be links to new pages on the wiki? > >> > >> So I have no objection to them being merged. > >> > >> Steve > >> > >> > >> Another important consideration, in your company policy is > >> business > >> considerations. > >> > >> We could change the title to "business considerations and > >> making a policy" > >> > >> > >> How about "Business and Policy Considerations" > >> > >> Steve > >> > >
Received on Thursday, 7 January 2021 17:09:14 UTC