Feedback: Developing Organizational Policies on Web Accessibility

Please provide your comments inline below.

Comment template:

Comments for December 2nd, 2014

Specific content type conformance milestones — Should there be a suggestion of a staged policy for different content types?
Extent of third-party content example Policy — How extensive should the example for third-party providors be?
ATAG version Policy — What version number should be used for ATAG?
Scope doesn't extend to IT infrastructure Policy — The scope of the policy document concerns web content but there is also a potential need for an IT infrastructure policy on accessibility.
spacing around examples — Where there is more than one example, they need to be more clearly differentiated non-visually.

Document is ready for all feedback including more detailed comments.

summary — comment {name, date}
{Done, Kevin, 4 Oct}: version — I thought that we generally suggset that people do not include a version number, so that it can take up the newest version? old doc said: "Organizations wishing to require conformance to the latest version of the standards may specify conformance without specifying a version number." and the examples there are version-number-less {Shawn, 5 October 2014}
{Done, Kevin, 26 Sep}: Example style — I find the 3D curved effect for the examples disconcerting when trying to read, possibly just give them a raised appearance instead? {Andrew, 2014.09.19}

Introduction, example of simple policy:
Current text: "ACME Inc. is committed to ensuring the accessibility of its website for people with disabilities."
Suggested change: add "and older people".
Rationale: It would include more people who may benefit from the web site's accessibility.
{Clarified point, Kevin 14 Nov 2014} In "define Scope of Policy", section examles, second sub-bullet is not clear, is it possible to make it easier to understand?
"Providing incentives to providers of WCAG 2.0 Level AA conformant content;"
{Raised as issue 22 in github, Kevin, 26 Nov}, In "set conformance milestones", "examples" I am not sure it is clear enough, visually or from the content, that these are seperated examples. The first two examples are two proposals for limit date for reaching conformance. I would like to know EOWG's mind about the clarity of those two examples:
" By February 27, 2015, ACME Inc's websites will meet WCAG 2.0, Level AA conformance.
By November 7, 2014, ACME Inc's websites will meet WCAG 2.0, Level A conformance; and by May 29, 2015 websites will meet WCAG 2.0, Level AA conformance."