[A11ybok] A (Hopefully Helpful) Step Back For Perspective & Clarity
srush at knowbility.org
Thu Mar 15 16:06:39 EDT 2012
Hi there Bill,
Yours is a welcome voice. On the previous
a11yBoK List, I offered much the same rationale
about the resources at the W3C/WAI working groups
and web sites and wikis. I thought perhaps I was
the only one who believed strongly in the value
of working cooperatively within an established,
international consensus-driven organization. I
know that the pace of the process is often
frustrating to many. However, if there is
growing momentum around organizing and clarifying
the BoK, that energy could be very well directed
within the new community groups and other avenues
developed for gathering public input.
>Gap Analysis like you said would be good. Perhaps more
>people would be able to bring up specific topics surrounding
>accessibility which they feel are underserved by existing resources.
This sounds to me like a great place to
begin. As we develop that analysis, we may also
want to review the list of deliverables, planned
deliverables and wish list of projects currently
on display by WAI's Education and Outreach
would embrace any help to turn the list into working projects.
At 11:49 AM 3/15/2012, bill wrote:
>I've just subscribed to this list. Thanks for your efforts Karl.
>[ As a quick personal intro, my name is Bill
>Shackleton. I share info and resources on
>twitter under CRPDisabilities, and since leaving
>the computer industry for the disability field
>almost 30 years ago, I've been involved in a
>number of issues tackling a wide range of barriers. ]
>Unfortunately I missed this year's CSUN and
>although I've read the blog post and this list's
>archives, I still have a few questions and
>comments that might help me to fill in the
>blanks and/or foster some discussion in the spirit of your comment:
>"Respectful disagreement is encouraged. That's how consensus is achieved."
>I'm responding to, and excerpting, comments from
>this list and the blog post but didn't catch who
>said what for citing sources.. except this, where the blog post begins:
>"It is now a well-accepted assumption that, in
>order to move forward, accessibility needs a
>unified set of resources that would be reliable,
>comprehensive, and easy to consume for users of
>all levels of proficiency in accessibility.
>There have been many discussions around this
>idea for a while. Yet, so far, it does not exist"
>I'm a little unclear about this. It seems that
>if we're talking about a reliable set of
>resources, then wouldn't that be found at
> From THE authoritative and most reliable source
>(ie the standard itself), you can also find
>getting started guides, how people with
>disabilities use the web, corporate business
>case development tools, policies from
>governments around the world, etc. etc. ..and
>expressed for different audiences whether
>techie, policy wonk or business manager.
>As for specific in-and-out web developer
>questions, you can quickly filter the existing
>BoK by technology (flash, pdf, smil, css..),
>success criteria, and technique type at
>"The WAI material, despite their efforts to
>guide the newcomers, isnât exactly appropriate
>for what I would call âoccasional
>practitionersâ. That is, people who punctually
>need to solve an accessibility issue, but
>donât have the time or will to go through the
>painfully slow process of getting the whole picture"
>In what way is it not appropriate? I suppose I
>need to understand more specifically. As noted
>above, no-one has to go through a 'slow process
>of getting the whole picture" at all. To
>'punctually solve an accessibility issue' you
>can either go to your own quick reference
>tailored in 5 seconds to your own technical and
>policy environment (success criteria level),
>select to see every technique on one large page
>and search it for your specific issue, or use
>any of a number of other tools at your disposal on the WAI site.
>"second order of business, IMO, should be for us to brainstorm
>funding opportunities. This would also necessitate a discussion of
>scope, but I think both discussions probably should remain at a high
>There has already been considerable funding by
>organizations big (Google, Adobe, Microsoft,..)
>and small - including my own modest enterprise,
>- to developing the standard and producing all
>of the resources, including what appears to be aimed at here.
>"Regarding this list, specifically, I'd like to strongly discourage
>Why? Is there an additional cost to this? I ask
>because, as you may know if you follow my
>CRPDisabilities twitter account, I default to
>open sharing of information unless there's a
>compelling reaon to lock something down. It
>seems to me that the more lurkers, the higher
>the probability of someone chiming in with a
>strond idea, excellent resource, etc.
>"I said no to Wikipedia a few times, let me clear
>that up by saying, that having the final product would be a great
>idea. However, starting there is maybe not the best idea"
>Why not? Although (unless convinced otherwise by
>responses to this email) I believe that the
>single repository for A11yBoK should be - is -
>w3c/wai, I don't see any reason for not
>leveraging the powerful and effective wikipedia
>collaboration machinery for iterating up to the final product you envision.
>"So, curation and collection of links are very
>useful, but we also need a significant effort in
>the production of resources, for all kinds of needs."
>Could you please be more specific? What,
>exactly, are the resources that we need that
>aren't on WAI? I suspect that whatever they are
>has probably already been created based on a
>real need.. which comes back to curation.
>"In addition to methodology, what would we like
>to accomplish, and by what date?"
>I agree with this.. in fact, I'd want to know
>what we'd like to accomplish before thinking
>about methodology. I would suggest, as a
>clarifying exersize and a way forward that we do a simple subtraction:
>Clarified statement of precisely what problem is being addressed
>Already existing resources on WAI to address this problem
>So far, as can be seen by my responses above, Gap Analysis = 0
>Once we get a clearer sense of the scope,
>quality and size of the gap (through our
>continuing discussions), THEN we could entertain
>options such as contributing to WAI to expand
>solutions, contributing to wikipedia to perhaps
>create a front-end ui pointing to existing BoK
>resources across the web, creating a federated
>solution, creating a permanent home, or some
>other ideas.. THEN look at whether, how much,
>and from where needed resources could be tapped.
>Hope this is seen as contributing discussion and
>movement, and not contrarian.
>"We are called to be architects of the future..
> Not its victims" R. Buckminster Fuller
>A11yBOK mailing list
>A11yBOK at a11ybuzz.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the A11ybok