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

Re: Accessibility philosophy (from the WCAG2/JAWS thread)

From: Peter Thiessen <thiessenp@acm.org>
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 20:14:56 +0200
Message-ID: <CALf9uGAYtyVAx8TmS5mmqA2r26fLF0Ovhyk4NBbGBjJsipd4hw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Richards, Jan" <jrichards@ocadu.ca>
Cc: Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net>, "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Thanks Jan!

I like the human touch in the article - I added that link to a draft
Wiki page I just created:

I'll be sure to add the points from the Mobile Symposium you and
other's brought up as well to that wiki page - on my to do list - stay
tuned :-)


On 30 July 2012 17:21, Richards, Jan <jrichards@ocadu.ca> wrote:
> (Using the subject Chaals suggests)
> Hi all,
> Here's a relevant economic report that was put together a couple years ago at the University of Toronto:
> http://martinprosperity.org/2010/06/14/releasing-constraints-projecting-the-economic-impacts-of-increased-accessibility-in-ontario/
> The report was released as the Canadian province of Ontario began rolling out standards for its "Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA)".
> Re: Marketing of accessibility: I think the Ontario government does a reasonable job of keeping things upbeat yet informative (http://www.mcss.gov.on.ca/en/mcss/programs/accessibility/index.aspx). I'm sure other governments are also taking this approach as well, for example this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEM9Fn9aOG8) by the Australian Government.
> Cheers,
> Jan
> (Mr) Jan Richards, M.Sc.
> jrichards@ocadu.ca | 416-977-6000 ext. 3957 | fax: 416-977-9844
> Inclusive Design Research Centre (IDRC) | http://idrc.ocad.ca/
> Faculty of Design | OCAD University
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Karen Lewellen [mailto:klewellen@shellworld.net]
>> Sent: July-28-12 2:18 PM
>> To: David Woolley
>> Cc: Bryan Garaventa; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
>> Subject: 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 Tuesday, 31 July 2012 18:15:29 UTC

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