- From: robert neff <robert.neff@uaccessit.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 21:47:18 +0800 (PST)
- 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 in > 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 and > not the spirit of > the guideline? > > >(2) Covering My Client's Ass in the event of being > 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 policy > 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, WAI- > 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