Comments on "How to Report Inaccessible Websites"

I think that the "Tips and Advice:" block is useful but people need to
know why it's there. Or is it obvious? Do they need to read the rest of
the document or not? Perhaps "Key points" or "At a glance" would
indicate that it is a summary of the rest of the document.

Spelling mistake in "And, as we said eaerlier" spelling "earlier."

Under "Why Bother": "Many web developers have long lists of potential
improvements, but issues raised by customers or site visitors will be
more front-of-mind for the site owner and developer." This seems a bit
roundabout. Perhaps it could be more direct, including the word
"priority": "There is usually a long list of potential improvements to
any website, but issues raised by customers or site visitors may be
given higher priority."

The "Why Bother" section might also mention (without going into
specifics) that complaints in the past have resulted in improvements.
Perhaps mention names people can search for like "the Target case" or
the "Sydney Olympics."

Under "Alternatives to Direct Contact" it might be better for people to
do this *first* to avoid going it alone in ignorance of some wider
initiative already being organised by a disability organisation.

Is email the best way to complain? Emails are very easy to ignore and
offer no proof of posting. They can get caught in spam filters and the
sender knows nothing about it. Perhaps a registered letter on paper that
requires a signature from the recipient could be more effective. It
might be easier to find the name of the officer responsible than to find
that person's email address, and then write directly to that person. The
letter would get to a secretary and have to be signed for and would sit
physically on the person's desk until read or disposed of.



Alan Chuter
Departamento de Usabilidad y Accesibilidad
Technosite - Grupo Fundosa
FundaciĆ³n ONCE
Tfno.: 91 121 03 30
Fax: 91 375 70 51

Received on Friday, 19 June 2009 07:16:09 UTC