[Business Case] - New Comment (was Re: EOWG - Evaluation Resources)

​
​[adding Sharron]

​
Clipping below and opening a new thread​
​ (Business Case - Comment)​



> So what I'm hearing is a suggestion to add the Winn-Dixie court case as a
> case study to the Business Case, as we did with the Sydney Olympics. I'm
> not sure who is editing that resource, but this seems like a useful
> suggestion for that resource manager and review team to consider.


​Thank you for the comment Vivienne. And thank you for the clarification
for the appropriate resource Shadi.

Sharron and I are the editors of the Business Case resource. We will take
this comment from Vivienne and include it in our rework of the resource as
appropriate.

Thanks,
Brent​



Brent A. Bakken
Director, Accessibility Strategy & Education Services
Pearson

512 202 1087
brent.bakken@pearson.com

Learn more at pearson.com

[image: Pearson]


On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 3:56 AM, Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org> wrote:

> Hi Vivienne,
>
> So what I'm hearing is a suggestion to add the Winn-Dixie court case as a
> case study to the Business Case, as we did with the Sydney Olympics. I'm
> not sure who is editing that resource, but this seems like a useful
> suggestion for that resource manager and review team to consider.
>
> Back to the evaluation resources, we already have that clarification in
> WCAG-EM (with references to the relevant sections of WCAG). It does not
> seem to me like we need to say more in the evaluation resources, right?
>
> I look forward to your "requirements analysis" for combined expertise!
>
> Best,
>   Shadi
>
>
> On 03/08/2017 05:12, Vivienne Conway wrote:
>
>> Hi Shadi
>> Thanks for your email.
>>
>> Regarding that guidance about third-party, I think we need to think
>> strategically.  People need a statement I think from WAI about third-party
>> that references the recent Winn-Dixie, and this might take the form of a
>> case study, similar to the one produced way back about the Sydney
>> Olympics.  So it should come up as awareness raising, but also something in
>> a number of areas e.g. business case, presentations etc.
>>
>> I'm happy to start the purpose, use cases and key message sections of
>> that 'combined expertise' document.  I'll start to rough out some ideas in
>> the next day or two.
>>
>>
>> Please be advised that I check my emails at approximately 9am and 4pm
>> each day (more or less).  If you require assistance sooner, please feel
>> free to telephone.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Vivienne Conway, Ph.D., B.IT (Hons), MACS (Snr) CP, AALIA(CS)
>> Director
>>
>> Web Key IT Pty Ltd
>> PO BOX 681 Wanneroo, WA 6946
>> Phone:    (08) 9206 3987
>> Mobile:   0415 383 673
>> Email:       v.conway@webkeyit.com
>> Website:  www.webkeyit.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> This communication, including any attachments, is intended solely for the
>> named addressee. It is confidential and may be subject to legal
>> professional privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, please
>> contact me immediately by reply email, delete it from your system and
>> destroy any copies. This email is subject to copyright, no part of it
>> should be reproduced, adapted or transmitted without the prior written
>> consent of the copyright owner. Any views expressed in this message are
>> those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of
>> Web Key IT Pty Ltd.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Shadi Abou-Zahra [mailto:shadi@w3.org]
>> Sent: Wednesday, 2 August 2017 7:08 PM
>> To: Vivienne Conway <v.conway@webkeyit.com>
>> Cc: public-eo-archive@w3.org
>> Subject: Re: EOWG - Evaluation Resources
>>
>> Hi Vivienne,
>>
>> Good point, I completely agree with the observation that people often
>> mistakenly think that third-party content is not covered by WCAG 2.0.
>>
>> As you correctly point out, we already have a corresponding section in
>> WCAG-EM to clarify the coverage of WCAG 2.0 for third-party content:
>>    - https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG-EM/#thirdparty
>>
>> What more do we need to say about this? Also, is this new guidance we
>> need to provide versus an awareness-raising campaign that is needed?
>>
>> Getting back to the rest of the workplan, I would be happy to complete
>> the draft template update. Can you maybe start working on the purpose, use
>> cases, and key messages of the "combined expertise" document? You could
>> simply start an EOWG wiki page for now if you're more comfortable with
>> that. Here are some requirements analyses documents to follow:
>>    - https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Eval_Analysis
>>    -
>> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Showcase_Examples_with_Videos
>> /Requirements_Analysis
>>    - https://github.com/w3c/wai-wcag-quickref/wiki/requirements-analysis
>>
>> Best,
>>     Shadi
>>
>>
>> On 02/08/2017 12:37, Vivienne Conway wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Shadi
>>>
>>> This all seems perfect to me, and I completely agree.
>>>
>>> My only additional thought is the issue people are having with
>>> third-party content and whether this needs to be involved in the
>>> evaluation or whether they can put it down as an exception to any
>>> compliance claim.  Currently people are using it as a 'get out of jail
>>> free card', but the recent US case of Winn-Dixie may well change all
>>> that. There could be information placed in the template or perhaps it
>>> should be located somewhere else completely.
>>>
>>> In WCAG-EM there is an optional section for 'combined expertise' so we
>>> can refer people to that when we deal with the 'using combined expertise'
>>> section in this resource.   There is also a section on 'evaluating
>>> third-party content' in WCAG-EM that can be referred to.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Please be advised that I check my emails at approximately 9am and 4pm
>>> each day (more or less).  If you require assistance sooner, please
>>> feel free to telephone.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Vivienne Conway, Ph.D., B.IT (Hons), MACS (Snr) CP, AALIA(CS) Director
>>>
>>> Web Key IT Pty Ltd
>>> PO BOX 681 Wanneroo, WA 6946
>>> Phone:    (08) 9206 3987
>>> Mobile:   0415 383 673
>>> Email:       v.conway@webkeyit.com
>>> Website:  www.webkeyit.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This communication, including any attachments, is intended solely for
>>> the named addressee. It is confidential and may be subject to legal
>>> professional privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, please
>>> contact me immediately by reply email, delete it from your system and
>>> destroy any copies. This email is subject to copyright, no part of it
>>> should be reproduced, adapted or transmitted without the prior written
>>> consent of the copyright owner. Any views expressed in this message
>>> are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the
>>> views of Web Key IT Pty Ltd.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Shadi Abou-Zahra [mailto:shadi@w3.org]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, 2 August 2017 6:11 PM
>>> To: Vivienne Conway <v.conway@webkeyit.com>
>>> Cc: public-eo-archive@w3.org
>>> Subject: Re: EOWG - Evaluation Resources
>>>
>>> [adding public EO archive for future reference]
>>>
>>> Hi Vivienne,
>>>
>>> Thanks for reaching out, I look forward to working with you on this!
>>>
>>> There are three separate documents in this package, and so I think we
>>> should first decide what we want to do with each:
>>>
>>> # Template for Accessibility Evaluation Reports
>>>
>>> In my view, people often want to see a template - either so they know
>>> what they should provide (eg. a webmaster being asked to evaluate the
>>> website) or what they should expect (eg. when contracting someone).
>>>
>>> This should be fairly easy to do, and I had already started working on
>>> it with Howard. Basically my idea is to take the "View Report" output
>>> from the WCAG-EM Report Tool and provide some annotations around it.
>>>
>>> Do you agree with this suggestion to keep and update this resource?
>>>
>>>
>>> # Using Combined Expertise to Evaluate Web Accessibility
>>>
>>> Many moons ago this used to be called "Review Teams" or so. Basically
>>> the key message is leveraging different expertise across organizations
>>> (eg.
>>> developer, designer, UX, IA, etc.) for comprehensive evaluations.
>>>
>>> I think this message is still useful but currently this document seems
>>> to go all over the place. I think we need go back to the drawing board
>>> and revise the objectives, use cases, and key messages from new. There
>>> is an outdated changelog from which we could start:
>>>     - https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/changelogs/cl-eval-teams
>>>
>>> What are your thoughts on this document and its usefulness?
>>>
>>>
>>> # Evaluation Approaches for Specific Contexts
>>>
>>> Historically this was a catch-all bucket for the entire resource suite.
>>> Meanwhile I think there is hardly any need for this document. Some of
>>> the key messages, like "evaluation during the development process" and
>>> "ongoing monitoring" are addressed by "Planning and Managing". Other
>>> messages could be incorporated in the "combined expertise" document.
>>>
>>> Unless you can think of "specific contexts" for evaluation that
>>> require additional guidance, then I think we could retire this document.
>>>
>>> Do you see current need for this document?
>>>
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>      Shadi
>>>
>>>
>>> On 02/08/2017 09:31, Vivienne Conway wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Shadi
>>>>
>>>> You and I are down for the Evaluation Resources in the EOWG Resource
>>>> Management sheet.  I can see that it has an '*' after the title and
>>>> that it isn't clear if this required before or after launch yet.
>>>> https://www.w3.org/WAI/eval/Overview
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Should we work out a project plan?  If so, what would you like me to do?
>>>> I'm not comfortable with GitHub as I've never worked with it before,
>>>> but I'm working through a tutorial on it.  I'm also still a bit fuzzy
>>>> on how we go about evaluating the resources.  Any guidance and tasks
>>>> you can provide would be very much appreciated, as I don't want to
>>>> get
>>>>
>>> behind in this work.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I can see that some of the links are very old and should probably be
>>>> updated or retired, so perhaps this is where to start?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please be advised that I check my emails at approximately 9am and 4pm
>>>> each day (more or less).  If you require assistance sooner, please
>>>> feel free to telephone.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Vivienne Conway, Ph.D., B.IT (Hons), MACS (Snr) CP, AALIA(CS)
>>>>
>>>> Director
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Web Key IT Pty Ltd
>>>>
>>>> PO BOX 681 Wanneroo, WA 6946
>>>>
>>>> Phone:    (08) 9206 3987
>>>>
>>>> Mobile:   0415 383 673
>>>>
>>>> Email:        <mailto:v.conway@webkeyit.com> v.conway@webkeyit.com
>>>>
>>>> Website:   <http://www.webkeyit.com/> www.webkeyit.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This communication, including any attachments, is intended solely for
>>>> the named addressee. It is confidential and may be subject to legal
>>>> professional privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, please
>>>> contact me immediately by reply email, delete it from your system and
>>>> destroy any copies. This email is subject to copyright, no part of it
>>>> should be reproduced, adapted or transmitted without the prior
>>>> written consent of the copyright owner. Any views expressed in this
>>>> message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily
>>>> reflect the views of Web Key IT Pty Ltd.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/ Accessibility
>>> Strategy and Technology Specialist Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
>>> World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
>>>
>>> ---
>>> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
>>> http://www.avg.com
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/ Accessibility
>> Strategy and Technology Specialist Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) World
>> Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
>>
>>
> --
> Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/
> Accessibility Strategy and Technology Specialist
> Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
> World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
>
>