Re: WCAG 2.0 and JAWS

David is in my view straight on here.
When decisions are made the question is first asked, what will we gain?
That may mean how much profit, how much pr etc.
The marketing people are not getting the numbers that reflect how 
beneficial on  many levels access is.
Given the vast academic outfits involved, I am frankly surprised someone 
has not done this by now.
The sort of market research that demonstrates how much  individuals 
experiencing disabilities actually put into the economy sort of research.
My guess has always been that the research is not done because of the 
typical focus, be accessible because the law requires it, or because it 
is the kind thing to do...not because you tap into revenue that way.

The engineers may want to do it, because making things accessible can be 
fun if presented like that.
the marketing department may veto it though because they think it plays to 
a knish with no benefit resulting.
Again its these sorts of people who should learn more about the positive 
aspects of access.

Karen

On Sat, 28 Jul 2012, David Woolley wrote:

> Bryan Garaventa wrote:
>>
>>  The only way to implement true web accessibility in the future is to
>>  involve
>>  engineers at the corporate, organizational, and academic levels.
>>  Otherwise,
>>  more and more policies will be created, and relatively few will have the
>>  knowledge or desire to understand them.
>> 
>
> In my view, the failure is much more likely to arise from marketing people 
> than engineers.  Whilst most engineers may not realise, even those who do, 
> and may even raise an issue report, are likely to get overruled by marketing. 
> Some may self censor, because they know they will be rejected, and most may 
> just have learned to think like marketing people as the best way of being 
> appreciated in the organisation.
>
>
>

Received on Saturday, 28 July 2012 18:18:22 UTC