[A11ybok] Resources -- either models or possible data for inclusion

[bill]

Hi Olivier, Ryan

"The Section 508 site is highly political, policy oriented. The 508.."

I wasn't aware of the political nature of this, but your post did get me thinking a little about process
and perhaps the possible usefulness of a kind of snapshot of it.. at least from my perspective.
This may also help any newcomers to this list trying to get a little context.

It seems to me now that we have a couple of main streams of activity happening.

The first, which I would consider the 'critical path' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_path_method)
 is about developing a gap analysis from which we can (through a couple more steps at that point)
ultimately derive a roadmap for moving forward on the development of the Accessibility BoK.
The way we are developing this gap analysis is to create a picture of what our BoK will look
like / contain / appeal to / etc ("To-Be"), and then subtract from that what already exists
'out there' ("As-Is"), whether that be on the W3C Web Accessibility Initiative site or elsewhere.
On this path, we are at the initial ideas collection stage where people are
submitting "Just a list of specific topics or features, even if it is just at a high level. If you
keep the topics terse and clear, there's no need for justification *just a list*"
(http://a11ybuzz.com/pipermail/a11ybok_a11ybuzz.com/2012-March/000022.html)

The second stream of activity, running parallel and being captured under the thread "Resources -- either models or

possible data for inclusion", seems to be a catch-all for specific resources that people would like to see

Included in the BoK and/or contributions that people sharing feel might be useful to the

discussion. [ Sorry, my iPad has now decided to double-space :-0 ]


In either case, may I suggest that we allow a kind of a free-wheeling brainstorming approach in

that we suspend - for now, at this stage - assessing / rating / judging contribution (or perhaps,

 using a different thread for that). I just want to clarify that my own particular contribution

the section508.gov<http://section508.gov> may legitimately 'carry baggage' or have some other valid reason for

disqualification from the ultimate BoK product, I don't know. It's just that I've seen progress bog

down in other projects before as people get caught up in issues that might be better addressed

as part of a process rather than ad hoc. That process, I believe, will likely happen once we've

finished collecting our 'To-Be' material and are beginning to prioritize and begin to develop

criteria for inclusion into BoK. It's just that I would like to let this process have a chance to

play out - hopefully with an Accessibility Body of Knowledge that we can all be proud of :-)


Cheers

Bill Shackleton

www.twitter.com/CRPDisabilities<http://www.twitter.com/CRPDisabilities>
==================================
"We are called to be architects of the future..
 Not its victims"            R. Buckminster Fuller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://a11ybuzz.com/pipermail/a11ybok_a11ybuzz.com/attachments/20120320/f08ed9d8/attachment-0001.html>