Re: EOWG work this week & agenda

Hi Wayne,

We are still trying to work out how this and the improving documents 
should work together. Maybe adding a section, like we do for policies, 
might be a viable approach. I will discuss this with Kevin.

Some of this also relates to what Sharron was talking about, with 
accessibility being an intrinsic and on-going aspect rather than a 
waterfall-type process. Addressing that may help your point too.

Thanks for your feedback!

Best,
   Shadi


On 29.8.2014 13:57, Wayne E Dick wrote:
> I am not sure why retrofitting is not an explicit issue in this
> document.  I know there was originally a planned document on improving
> accessibility, but generally people do not start with a new site.
> Actually the concept improving accessibility does not really apply with
> a zero accessibility site.
>
> Whether you have an existing site or a new site, implementing
> accessibility should describe starting accessibility from where your
> are.  Regarding this there is the key issue of triage.  What do you fix
> and what do you let die.  How do you scope change? How do you establish
> a timeline? What sections are essential for people with disabilities?
> eg. The American Heart Association had an inaccessible page that
> described what to do if you thought you were having a heart attack. In
> large organizations this requires serious organizational discussion and
> qualitative data gathering and analysis.
>
> These considerations may be sprinkled throughout: Goals,
> Responsibilities, Training, Life Cycle and Maintenance. This really
> feels like a start up site description, which is a 1% case.
>
> Wayne
>
>

-- 
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)