Re: [more] naming for "Methodology"

Le 11-10-11 11:05, RichardWarren a écrit :
> 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.
Hi Richard,

I must admit I disagree : we should use in the title enough words to 
explicit what it has inside, because some peoples will discover it alone 
and we won't be in all case besides them to explain what the title means 
- and we can't be sure to have an elevator with us to sing our pitch to 
them... ;-)
>
> 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>
+1

It opens the door to ideas like action verbs : AccessTestIt, AccTestit, 
TestAccess, TestAcc, AccCheckibility, CheckAccessibility, AccessEval, 
Evalaccess...

-- 

Vincent François
Directeur général

*Coopérative AccessibilitéWeb*
1751 rue Richardson, bureau 6111
Montréal (Qc), Canada H3K 1G6

vincent.francois@accessibiliteweb.com 
<mailto:vincent.francois@accessibiliteweb.com>
http://www.accessibiliteweb.com <http://www.accessibiliteweb.com/>
Tél. : +1 514-312-3378
Sans frais : +1 877-315-5550