- From: Peter Thiessen <thiessenp@acm.org>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 20:14:56 +0200
- 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: http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Accessibility_Business_Case 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 :-) cheers, +peter 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