The meeting concentrated on reviewing the Draft of Developing a Web Accessibility Business Case for Your Organization prior to requesting EOWG to approve for publishing.
<andrew> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/bcase/Overview.html
andrew: final draft before
publishing it
... introduction: give people a
better idea about the document
... encourage people to develop their own business
case
william: change "is increasingly ..." to "has ..."
andrew: in some parts of the world it still has to become an important resource
Michael: regarding accessible web-shops
have increased trustworthiness. we need evidence for this.
... will discuss with my team after the meeting and see what we can offer
William: can we use 'ageing in place' in some arguments
<andrew> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/bcase/soc.html
Andrew: "A consideration of the social factors associated with Web accessibility can help understand the potential market and may also have an impact on the marketing an organization undertakes." should this sentence stay here or shall we move it to the financial section?
All: agree to keep it here.
Andrew: number of people with
disabilities depends very much on the measurement method and varies
therefore from country to country
...
Ageing is a little easier to quantify
Andrew: any additional comments on the section "Access for Older People"?
William: "Web Accessibility Benefits People With and Without Disabilities" tech details does not fit into "social factors" section
Michael: agree with William - it breaks the reading flow by having the technical bits here
Michael: maybe we can have a toggle to hide / unhide the technical notes
Andrew: we may be able to take out the WCAG 1.0 references in future [but WCAG 1.0 is still very current for many]
<andrew> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/bcase/tech.html
William:universal design should be an argument in favour of incorporating accessibility early
William: people should take a long view because of legal and social issues - accessibility now is cheaper than legal costs later
<andrew> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/bcase/fin.html
andrew: discussing the argument:
"priority in the organization to retain the knowledge and
experience of its older employees"
... shall we keep the argument (here)?
All:the group agrees to keep this here
Andrew: keep " Retention of
knowledge and expertise of older employees" in section "Direct
Cost Savings"
... add note about recruitment and training costs for new
employees
Michael: in a recent large
multi-lingual project, we had the additional cost of translating alt text
- 19,000 Euro to translate for about 3,000 images
... a big cost!
... small in relation to text translation, but not factored in and an unbudgetted cost
... was actually a case of increasing costs of accessibility
<andrew> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/bcase/pol.html
No additional discussion