W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2012

Re: WCAG 2.0 and JAWS

From: <accessys@smart.net>
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2012 14:27:09 -0400 (EDT)
To: Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net>
cc: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>, Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@whatsock.com>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.60.1207281426210.25474@cygnus.smart.net>

all good points, and I've actually heard PR folks veto accessibility 
because "it is not the image we wish to project"


On Sat, 28 Jul 2012, Karen Lewellen wrote:

> Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2012 14:17:59 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net>
> To: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
> Cc: Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@whatsock.com>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> Subject: Re: WCAG 2.0 and JAWS
> Resent-Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2012 18:18:24 +0000
> Resent-From: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> 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 18:28:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:36:40 UTC