Re: Executive Summary - EOWG Review: Standards Harmonization doc (June 2011)


Thanks for taking a stab at a shortened Exec Summ 
to show what a much-shortened Exec Summ would 
look like. I think that using somewhat shorter 
bullets on the fragmentation and harmonization 
chunks is feasible, as we discussed in the WG 
meeting; but if too short, they may not contain 
enough information to be understandable or 
credible even if being read on the run. For the 
narrative introductory paragraph, my concern 
would be shortening so much as to lose the 
distinctiveness of this piece for its intended 
audience. I've looked at it while shortening the 
Exec Summ, but not used directly. A newly revised 
online draft is now available.

- Judy

At 01:30 PM 6/24/2011 -0500, Shawn Henry wrote:

>>>Overall issues for discussion [strong suggestion for EOWG consideration]:
>>>I think the Exe Sum should be pared down quite a bit and significantly
>>>simplified. The document feels really repetitive in an uncomfortable way
>>>­ because the Exe Sum is so detailed. The current version of the document
>>>is easy to skim, and I think future edits will make it even more highly
>>>skimmable. This relieves the some of the burden from the Executive Summary.
>>>The target audience for the Exe Sum is people who will only read a tiny
>>>bit (at least at first, we hope they’ll go back and read the rest later)
>>>­ e.g., on their way into a meeting on accessibility policies. How about
>>>making it even more quickly consumable. For example, like a presentation
>>>has short bullets projected on screen but the speaker expounds on them ­
>>>make the Exe Sum really direct, very succinct, and a lot shorter, and then
>>>the rest of the doc expounds on the points for those who have the time or
>>>need to understand more.
>Hi all,
>I took a pass at the level of executive summary 
>I was thinking of. This is *very rough* and some 
>wording not right at all -- it just provides a rough idea in case it helps.
>Accessibility of the Web is essential to enable 
>the participation of people with disabilities in 
>the Information Society. Policy makers and many 
>different stakeholders play an important role in 
>achieving web accessibility. When developing 
>policies for web accessibility, regional, 
>national, local governments and organizations 
>benefit from using existing web accessibility 
>standards from the international World Wide Web 
>Consortium (W3C). [[For example, those that have 
>adopted W3C€™s Web Content Accessibility 
>Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 are benefiting from @@shortlist.]]
>However, when organizations use divergent 
>versions of standards, this fragmentation can have negative impacts such as:
>* Spending resources to develop different 
>technical support and training materials
>* Requiring international organizations to use multiple different standards
>* Those following local standards not being able 
>to compete in international market
>* Not having support for divergent standards in 
>authoring tools and evaluation tools
>Harmonizing with international standards has many benefits such as:
>* Saving resources by using the extensive, 
>freely available, well tested technical support and training materials
>* Competing in an international environment
>* Leveraging support for web accessibility 
>standards in existing authoring tools and evaluation tools
>* Spending resourcing on local concerns such as 
>raising awareness, translating materials, customized training, etc.
>This document provides information on the 
>benefits of standards harmonization, the issues 
>with fragmentation, and how to optimize use of 
>existing W3C WAI materials and local resources 
>to effectively make the Web more accessible.

Received on Monday, 27 June 2011 07:04:26 UTC