A suggestion for W3M?

This email is one of these good idea at the time type things, and may not be
relevant or helpful to anyone...

It seems to me that the WAI has solved one of the general problems facing
the W3C

There is always been a problem with people from different disciplines
communicating with each other. Technical and business being just one example
of a generalized problem. I do not thing the issue relates to RDF but how we
present the potential of technical advancements to people with other skill
sets. Personally I think this physiological barrier may be the biggest
course in the slow adoption of realy useful new W3C technologies like RDF.

At the WAI we have an EO who work at explaining why we are  doing what we
are doing - translating the technical benefits into social, business or
marketing terms.
I am wondering if this approach would not work well across the W3C , the
business case for Xforms, rdf -  benefits verses cost, risk verses
opportunity.
Why XHTML2.0? for managers and policy makers. ...
Once policy makers decide to adopt a technology the team get sent on train
courses and will adopt it.

A suggestion for W3M?

Keep well and all the best,

Lisa

Lisa Seeman
UB Access
Tel: +972-2-648-3782 (please note our new number)
Website:   www.ubaccess.com

THIS E-MAIL CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION AND IS INTENDED FOR THE
RECIPIENT OF THIS E-MAIL ONLY.