W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2002

Re: : Thorns pruned - thanks! [long]

From: robert neff <robert.neff@uaccessit.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 21:47:18 +0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <200202120547.AAA03400@swiftsure.cnchost.com>
To: david@davidsaccess.com, steve@juggler.net, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org

what you are experiencing is no different than 
others tring to mold a business to support web 
accessibility.  it is difficult and the more time 
spent working a client or teaching when snafus 
happen, impacts the projects margin. if your client 
imposes deadlines or requirements or levels, then 
you need to have solid intelligence on your client 
and also be a solid negotiator and stick to your 
contract.  also ask, how good a project manager is 
my client and if i spend more time here, can i get 
follow-on work?  look at the pro and con.

web accessiblity is difficult to complete as an end 
to end solution on a fixed cost. the real value is 
treating web accessibilty as a structured approach, 
rather than a one price solution. need a great 
account representative up front to establish the 
client relationship, so the program manager can 
concentrate on the project, timeline, metrics and 
risk AND budget.
you have to understand the clients requirements and 
assess the operation from a management as well as a 
techinical and business skill vantage point.

the way to cover your client's behind and yours is 
to address risks in the proposal and statement of 
work.  that is one way to protect yourself and that 
is by assigning project metrics and reviews with 
sign-offs.  project management has to strong here to 
pave the way for success!
i still contend the way to implement accessibilty 
best is on the redesign.  if tables and forms are 
not heavily used then a simple after the fact will 
do. but if this is a retail or an high-end site then 
this must be done in synch with the code.  because 
most of the site's effort will be put toward quality 
assurance and testing, which is expensive.
note, the developers should be testing their own 
templates and code but that takes training.

by the way, after an absence from the interest group 
mailing list, i am back! 
cheers, rob
-----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of David M. Clark
> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 9:32 PM
> To: 'Steve Carter'; 'wai-ig list'
> Subject: RE: Thorns pruned - thanks! [long]
> Stseve,
> >.I'm walking a fine line - or traversing a locus 
> highly dimensional
> >space - here, between
> your not succeding.
> >(1) Real accessibility - 'inclusive design' as I 
> have branded it
> as in parsing the guidelines for only the letter 
> not the spirit of
> the guideline?
> >(2) Covering My Client's Ass in the event of 
> accused of
> neglecting it
> as a technologist or as a lawyer?
> >(3) Meeting My Client's Self-Imposed Measuring-
> Stick (i.e. my client
> has
> stated its pages will be WAI-AA compliant) while I 
> can recommend a
> slackening of that stricture, it is still the 
> at this time and so
> I
> have to educate the authors accordingly.
> You educate or have TO BE EDUCATED?
> >(4) Not winding up the web authors to the point 
> where they decide they
> don't
> >want to bother at all.  I won't be asked back, 
> AA won't be met, and
> >Accessibility will suffer a PR blow as people 
> decide it's just too
> much.
> Selling snow to eskimos is not a reflection on the 
> quality of the snow
> dc
> ----------------------------------------
> David M. Clark
> Marathon Ventures
> http://www.marathonventures.com
> dclark@marathonventures.com
> ph: 617/859-3069
Received on Tuesday, 12 February 2002 00:47:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:36:07 UTC