- From: RichardWarren <richard.warren@userite.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 16:05:55 +0100
- To: "Shadi Abou-Zahra" <shadi@w3.org>, "Eval TF" <public-wai-evaltf@w3.org>
Dear Shadi and team. My personal concern is that the acronym be easy to use and remember. I really do not care if it includes 'magic' words such as Accessibility or WCAG. For that reason I very much prefer something like SITE. If I have to do " an elevator pitch" it is much better to say "SITE is a standardised method for checking that websites comply with accessibility guidelines" and know that it will be remembered. I could even live with WAMBAM (Web Assessment Methodology for Bringing Accessibility to the Masses) if I have too - certainly easy on the tongue and brain - but perhaps not quite 'serious' enough <G> Cheers Richard. -----Original Message----- From: Shadi Abou-Zahra Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 9:00 AM To: Eval TF Subject: [more] naming for "Methodology" Dear group, It seems that there is some support for: - Methodology for Assessing Website Conformity to WCAG 2.0 Some issues and questions raised include: - it does not include the word "accessibility" (though it is part of the acronym WCAG, which we would likely expand in the title anyway); - should it be "WCAG 2.0" versus "WCAG 2" (to cover all 2.x versions); - should we use the term "assessing" versus "evaluation"; - should we use the term "conformity" versus "conformance"; - the title does not lend itself to a catchy acronym. Here are some more ideas to play around with: - Methodology for Assessing Website Conformance to WCAG 2 - Methodology for Evaluating Website Conformity to WCAG 2 - Methodology for Evaluating Website Accessibility Conformance - Methodology for Conformance Evaluation of Websites for Accessibility - Conformance Evaluation of Websites for Accessibility - Conformance Evaluation of Websites to WCAG 2 The previous ideas are included below too. Happy brainstorming. Best, Shadi On 6.10.2011 07:18, Shadi Abou-Zahra wrote: > Dear group, > > As trivial as it may sound it is time for us to think about a name for > the Methodology, so that we can start fleshing it out. > > Here are some brainstorms to get your creativity flowing: > > > # Favorites: > - Sampling, Inspection, and Technical Evaluation [of Websites for WCAG > 2.0] (SITE) ... especially when used in combination like "WCAG 2.0 SITE" > - Methodology for Assessing Website Conformity to WCAG 2.0 (MAC) > > > # Alternatives: > - Conformance Evaluation of Websites for Accessibility (CEWA or Conf) > - Accessibility Conformance Evaluation of Websites (ACEW) > - Conformance/Conformity Assessment Procedure (CAP) > - Conformance/Conformity Assessment Methodology (CAM) > - Website Accessibility Evaluation (WAE) > - Website Accessibility Assessment (WAA) > - Website Accessibility Methodology (WAM) > - Website Accessibility Assessment Procedure (WAAP) > - Website Accessibility Assessment Methodology (WAAM) > - Website Accessibility Evaluation Procedure (WAEP) > - Website Accessibility Evaluation Methodology (WAEM) > - Website Accessibility Inspection Procedure (WAIP) > - Website Accessibility Inspection Methodology (WAIM) > > > # Not serious: > - Conformance of Websites (CoW, WCAG-CoW, or WAI-CoW) > - Accessibility Conformance of Websites (A-CoW) > - Procedure for Accessibility Inspection (PAI like "pay") > - Procedure for Evaluation of Accessibility (PEA) > - Procedure for Evaluation of Accessibility Conformance (PEACe) > - Accessibility Evaluation of Websites (AEW) > - Harmonized Assessment Methodology (HAM) > - WCAG 2.0 Harmonized Assessment Methodology (WHAM) > - Website Conformance Assessment Guidelines (WCAG) > > > Best, > Shadi > -- Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/ Activity Lead, W3C/WAI International Program Office Evaluation and Repair Tools Working Group (ERT WG) Research and Development Working Group (RDWG)
Received on Tuesday, 11 October 2011 15:06:34 UTC