- From: Katie Haritos-Shea <ryladog@earthlink.net>
- Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 20:08:05 -0400
- To: "3WC WCAG" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <LPBBLABFJBGNHPLEJINNOENLCEAA.ryladog@earthlink.net>
> -----Original Message----- > From: Katie Haritos-Shea [mailto:kshea@apollo.fedworld.gov] On > Behalf Of Katie Haritos-Shea > Sent: Friday, September 08, 2000 2:47 PM > To: ryladog@earthlink.net > Subject: My Action Item VERY LATE sorry > > Hi All, > Jason has already made some of the points that follow, moot, with > his revised text of Sept 8th, but I am sending the action item (at the end > of this note) anyway. > Wendy is certainly correct that many of the ideas expressed on this last > telecon are a rehashing of what was in the last face-to-face, which was in > March, I joined in April, and did not read backwards in the list as I > should have. I apologize for being thoughtless. The Requirements Draft > 2.0 clearly says (in 1) that we will address, at least, minimum > requirements across new languages (XML), we ensure that the deliverables > will be easy to use, and that we will work with EO to write to a more > diverse audience. And, that we will ensure that it is backwards > compatible. Now, I more completely understand Wendy's overly polite > impatience with our spouting. We are wasting valuable time, our public > awaits! > I Like Seeman's idea to clearly state the differences for input and > output devices, and how they relate to device independence. > Wendy, in response to our request to look at The Requirements Draft > 2.0, before it is sent off: should we add XSL in the parenthesis of the > first bullet (Presentation) of item #1? Other than the final wording for > backward compatability #6, it looks good to me to let it go. > To the "usability testing": I met this morning with four collegues > from my web-training days, we get together occassionally for brunch to > keep up with each others families and careers. One will be starting in a > new position in her telecom company. It is a large company with over 100 > offices internationally. She is in the number three web position, over > seeing a completely new web operation, (rebuilding it) fresh from the > ground up, of their intranet, internet, extranet and e-commerce > operations. Most of the work is going to be entirely outsourced. When I > asked her if her contracts will include and ensure accessibility, she had > no idea of what I was talking about ! > She agreed, along with a content specialist, and our webmaster > training professor, to be guinea pigs. I am sending the info off to them > now. So, to my first action item.................. > > > > Greetings, > I took on an action item to look at Jason, Wendy & Greggs', "Draft > Reformation of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines" of 23 August > 2000..................from a regular Joe's (or Joeinna's, in this case) > perspective. The approach was, an industry or government CIO, gives their > underling (a Webmaster, Manager, Marketing, Training, Janitorial or other > individual) the task of " Go find out what this Accessible Web Site issue > is, and then do what it takes to get it implemented here on our web > sites". One can imagine this happening all around the world, if not today > then with-in the next year or so. > > First, I did a search on most of the major US search engines on > "Accessible Web Design". I think this is where many people would start, I > am assuming (oh, no!), that they have never heard of the W3C. (Yahoo.com, > Google.com, Altavista.com, Dogpile.Com, Excite.com, Lycos.com, msn.com, > WebCrawler.com, hotbot.com, Snap.com. Iwon.com, GoTo.com, Looksmart.com, > FindWhat.com) In general, the sites were the expected ones, National > Science Foundation, Trace, HTML Writers Guild, NCAM, WDG Web Design Group, > WebAIM, disABILITY, useit.com, NADC UCLA, UsableWeb, NCSA Univ. of > Illinois, WGBH, Starling, AWARE, Ohio State Univ., Univ.of Iowa, DO IT- > Univ. of Washington State, Suite 101, Microsoft, Adobe, WebAble, USGA > National Mapping Information (Good site!). The W3C came up as a link on > the homepage on most of these sites. The majority of those links led you > to the WAI home page, a few to W3C home page, and some to WCAG WG home > page. Ohio State had a link directly to the Table of Contents of WCAG > 1.0. Bravo! Only one search engine had a direct link to WCAG > 1.0....................Yahoo! > > Second, I had several people I know, from various backgrounds > (management, new webmasters, students, seasoned html coders, instructors) > look at this page (Draft Reformation of the Web Content Accessibility > Guidelines), ALL of whom had never been to the W3C. I noted their FIRST > impressions and then their more detailed written suggestions later. (Yes, > there are many seasoned html folks who have not heard of the W3C, until > now.) > > Third, I tried to view the page with my freinds perspectives in > mind. > > SO.....................what follows are our responses, painful as it may > be (I apologize in advance for feather > ruffling)..........................here goes. > > > > (This is assuming that we are successful in getting the exact WCAG 2.0 > page to be THE page that is directly linked from all those website > home-pages I mentioned above (seems like we have the people with the pull > in various organizations to get that done, and I beleive we should !)) > > > A.) What is all this stuff at the top of the page? > > B.) What do I know of, or care about, which version this is and how it > has changed from the last? This information is surely valuable, but it > should be placed as a footnote, or somewhere other than the top, or have a > very small breif explaination. > I want to find out how to make my tables accessible, or give a breif to > my management team, or write a homework assignment. Where is that stuff? > > C.) The "Status" is relevent, but, should be much shorter. > > D.) Each page needs a terse "soundbyte" at the top, telling you what you > will find on this page. Also links at the TOP to the other pages with alt > text (or not), telling exactly what you will find there. > > E.) Need to have quick clear choices when you first hit the page, on > where you need to go if you are: > a policy maker (non-technical page, > executive summary), > or, a webmaster (technology specific > pages), > or, an educator or student > (tutorials, power-point presentations, in and out of the 3WC domain) > or, a veteran web or software > developer (technology specific and all other relevant 3WC documents) > or, a regulator/attorney > (checkpoints) > or, an IT manager (executive > summary, checkpoints) > > > F.) As a freind who calls himself a "management weenie" said, " I want a > one, two or three page summary, giving me all the information I need to > know, to intelligently skim resumes and interview webmasters . I don't > need or want the technical details, the web people need that, I need to > know what must be done (not HOW), to breif my bosses. Then I need a > checklist to determine if the person I hired did it all, so I can go back > to those same bosses, and assure them that their rear-ends are now > covered." (Can you say, Executive Summary?) > > G.) Principles 3, 4, and 5 do not have exampled explainations before the > Guidelines start, as 1 and 2, do. > > H.) What is a user agent? > > I.) Do not understand those links under principle 1. > > (* I know that the WAI page covers many of these things but it has that > same "get me out of this nightmare" un-welcoming look W3C feel about it*) > > > Katie Haritos-Shea > Webmaster, CIW > Section 508 Coordinator > NTIS/Fedworld > Department of Commerce > 5285 Port Royal Road > Springfield, Virginia, 22161 > ph 703-605-6426 fax 703-605-6734 > <mailto:kshea@fedworld.gov> > > > > > > > > > >
Received on Sunday, 10 September 2000 20:09:25 UTC