RE: My Action Item VERY LATE sorry

HI guys, I am more of a listener than a giver to this board, but I have
spoken in the past when my comments have value.  If you guys are looking to
boost your web rankings. I can help.. This is what my company does. I would
gladly give free advice on how to get the W3C website promoted.  An article
on my company can be found here:

I am the goofy looking guy heheheh, but I am happy to help out a group that
helps others!!

Jason Hinkin
Vice President of Technology
+61 3 9827 3822

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Katie Haritos-Shea []
> Sent:	Monday, September 11, 2000 10:08 AM
> To:	3WC WCAG
> Subject:	FW: My Action Item VERY LATE sorry
> 	 -----Original Message-----
> 	From: 	Katie Haritos-Shea []  On
> Behalf Of Katie Haritos-Shea
> 	Sent:	Friday, September 08, 2000 2:47 PM
> 	To:
> 	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.
> (,,, Dogpile.Com,,,
>, In general, the sites were the expected ones,
> National Science Foundation, Trace, HTML Writers Guild, NCAM, WDG Web
> Design Group, WebAIM, disABILITY,, 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) 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
> 	<>

Received on Sunday, 10 September 2000 20:31:29 UTC