- From: Sharron Rush <srush@knowbility.org>
- Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 10:52:17 -0500
- To: 'EOWG' <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <4da4752d.ee05ec0a.59db.1340@mx.google.com>
hmmmm...spring must be in the air if we are pruning, fertilizing, composting and watering our web sites. This is a helpful metaphor Cliff, thanks! At 10:38 AM 4/12/2011, Cliff Tyllick wrote: >Char, I agree. I think our best bet is to limit >the metaphor and address the time required with, "It depends." > >After all, to get fruit from a tree, you could >start plant a seed, transplant a sapling, or >rehabilitate a mature but neglected specimen. >But practically no one in our audience is >sitting there wondering what their first website >should look like. They all have websites that >are at various stages short of performing to >their potential. So we make the metaphor caring >for the tree you already have, not planting a tree from seed. > >So what can you do to rehabilitate a neglected tree? To fix a website? > >For a tree, ensure that it has a sound root >system -- add compost to the soil, fertilize if >needed, make sure it's getting the right amount >of water. For a website, make sure the code >follows standards, that heading tags provide a >sound structure and valid tab order, that color >contrast is adequate, and that meaningful images are explained. > >In both cases, you might have already done that. >If so, getting where you need to be will take less time. > >For a tree, prune for strong branching and to >select fruitful stems. For a website, improve >the link text, improve your forms, and use skip >links to make skimming easier. In both cases, >this gives sustained benefits only if the >underlying structure is sound. But, in both >cases, doing this will lead to benefits in the >near future as well as over the long term. > >And then there's the issue of scale. Are you >reviving one tree, or a whole orchard? Does your >website have ten pages, or ten thousand? So, it depends. > >And, even if you aren't involved in e-commerce, >you will see improvements in the efficiency of >producing information and its effectiveness when >published. Not all trees are fruit trees; some >we plant because we need their shade. > >Does that work better than the image of planting a tree? > >Cliff > > >From: Char James-Tanny <charjt@helpstuff.com> >To: 'EOWG' <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org> >Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 9:18 AM >Subject: Re: Suggested for Biz Case slides > >But isn't everything relative? I mean, will >people really look at an image of a tree and >think that it takes 40 years to get full advantage of an accessible website? > >I think the tree fits the metaphor, and I think >people will understand that it's time in >general, not specific time, that is being >described. (We could always add a description to >that effect.) And while other plants might >better describe the "quickness", the fastest >plants are annuals...and they die at the end of the season. > >-----Original Message----- >From: ><mailto:w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org>w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org >[mailto:w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Shawn Henry >Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 1:10 PM >To: EOWG >Cc: Cliff Tyllick; Sharron Rush >Subject: Re: Suggested for Biz Case slides > > Thanks for the ideas on images to represent ROI. > >I like several things about the tree image; >however, I have one disconnect: how slowly trees >grow. For example, I think it takes around 5 >years for an apple tree to bear fruit. I'm >concerned that the slow growth of a tree might >make it a poor metaphor for the point we want to get across. > >I think we want the image to convey that in many >cases organizations will start seeing returns >within a few days of launching a redesign that >fixed significant accessibility issues. > >(p.s. Some personal perspective: We considered >planting some young trees last year and were >dismayed at how long it would take them to grow >to the height we wanted. On the other hand, I've >been watching my chives grow over an inch per day the last few days!) > >Looking forward to more thoughts... >~Shawn > > > >On 4/9/2011 11:29 PM, Cliff Tyllick wrote: > > Cecelia, that's similar to the thought that I > had — although being more literal-minded, I was > thinking in terms of a graph. The more I think > about it, the better I like the image of a > tree, though. But let's tie each stage of > investment to an example that shows that the > type and amount of return you will get depends > on the type of business you're in. > > > > The tree is your information resources. If > you plant it right, water it properly, and give > it time to develop a good root system, it will > at least stand sturdy and give you shade. This > is like a governmental agency, which derives no > profit from its content, still getting payback > from an accessible site in the form of greater > efficiency. How? Because they use their > word-processing software properly, it > consistently produces a complete and correct > table of contents for any document in an > instant. And because they've separated content > from presentation in the development of their > website, they can easily repurpose it for cell phones and other mobile devices. > > > > But maybe you're a nonprofit, and all those > meaningful links have helped more people find > your site. Some of those people need your > services, so you're reaching them more > efficiently, but some of those people are > potential donors, and you're reaching them, > too. Another year's growth. Another year's > leaves. How much? It depends, but for this > documented example, traffic increased this percentage. > > > > And what if you're not a nonprofit? What if > any part of your site is for e-commerce? Then > you're still another case — your content drives > your inncome, and the branches of your tree are > bearing fruit. (Let's make them oranges — > circles are easy to draw, and orange can stand > out well agaiinst deep green. Try FF8000 > against 053106.) Better SEO, more fruit, more > income. How much more? Well, it depends on how > integral the Web can be to your business. But in this case... > > > > You see where I'm going? Integrate the > "investment in your tree" slides and discussion > into the "documented results" discussion. We might not need to add many slides. > > > > And, to the end, add a slide that shows > another year's growth, another crop of fruit. > And make the point that just as you don't have > to replant a peach tree every year, you don't > have to retrain your employees every year, > either. But, with your and their continued > understanding of and focus on accessibility, > the benefits will continue to accrue. > > What do you guys think? Would this be a good > direction for us to take? If so, I'll work on a > revised series of slides that demonstrate the concept. > > > > Cliff > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---------- > > *From:* Cecilia Farell > <<mailto:cecilia@ceciliafarell.ca>cecilia@ceciliafarell.ca> > > *To:* Sharron Rush <<mailto:srush@knowbility.org>srush@knowbility.org> > > *Cc:* EOWG <<mailto:w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>w3c-wai-eo@w3.org> > > *Sent:* Sat, April 9, 2011 4:39:33 PM > > *Subject:* Re: Suggested for Biz Case slides > > > > Hi Sharron et. al.: > > > > I really like that. The one thing I would add > is some way of representing the change over > time, i.e., return increases as investment decreases. > > > > How about if we repeat the image over 2 or 3 > slides, with the 1st showing a lot of "root > fertilization" with little tree growth, the 2nd > showing less fertilization and more branches > and trees, and the 3rd (well you get the point)? > > > > If there is a limit on the # of slides, the 3 > images could be made smaller and placed all on one slide. > > > > Any thoughts? Thanks, > > > > Cecilia > > > > On 08/04/2011 5:18 PM, Sharron Rush wrote: > >> > >> Here it is as plain ppt (no x) Maybe that > will take care of the corruption . > >> > >> Thanks Char! > >> > >> > >> > >> At 04:12 PM 4/8/2011, Char James-Tanny wrote: > >>> Oh, I like that :-) Easy to understand, and right now, I canā€™t think > >>> of anything thatā€™s missing. (OTOH, my brain isnā€™t quite all here > >>> today, so Iā€™ll look at it again this weekend and compare it to some > >>> old presentations Iā€™ve done.) > >>> > >>> BTW, I got a ā€œthis file is corruptedā€ > message when I tried to open it. The Repair > function (Microsoft Office 2010) solved the problem, whatever it was. > >>> > >>> *From:* <mailto:w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org>w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org [ > >>> mailto:w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org] *On Behalf Of *Sharron Rush > >>> *Sent:* Friday, April 08, 2011 4:52 PM > >>> *To:* EOWG > >>> *Subject:* Suggested for Biz Case slides > >>> > >>> > >>> I did this in just a few minutes, but the > idea is what I am trying to convey rather than > the graphic design itself. I am sure someone can improve it. > >>> > >>> In this case, there are no numbers or > graphs that people will expect to relate to an > actual case study. it is clear that the ideas are conceptual. > >>> > >>> Whether they are as persuasive, well that's the question now, I guess. > >>> > >>> best, > >>> Sharron > >>> > >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> ---------------------------------------- > >>> Sharron Rush | Executive Director | > <http://www.Knowbility.org>www.Knowbility.org > >>> <http://www.knowbility.org/> | 512 305-0310 /Equal access to > >>> technology for people with disabilities/ > > > > -- > > > > Cecilia Farell > > <mailto:cecilia@ceciliafarell.ca>cecilia@ceciliafarell.ca > > > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 12 April 2011 15:52:45 UTC