Is it possible to guarantee absolute accuracy of the results of a laboratory for analysis? Is it possible to ensure no salmonella in an industrial production process? Is it possible to ensure the relevance of an image description? The answer is no. It is impossible to provide accurate and definitive answers. In this situation, the scientist, the legislature, or the manager must necessarily compensate for the uncertainty in the results with an excellent mastery of means.
The approach is very simple: First, we must establish what it can be formal, and anything that does not allow to be, to some resources in place to master uncertainty and risk.
To determine what must have an industrial approach to controlling and improving accessibility, we will achieve the following objectives:
Get a set of measurable and irrefutable.Able to control and continuously improve a set of fuzzy or non-measurable results.Each problem encountered by a visitor in any order whatsoever, represents a path of improvement. Every problem is a potential risk. In this sense, the approach becomes an accessibility analysis process, prevention and risk reduction. It can also be taken as a process of continuous improvement, and why not search for excellence.
Is it possible to frame an approach to risk prevention?Nothing prevents a framework for this type of approach in an extremely narrow, even in a legal context.
To do this, simply treat the subject matter to a set of risks, it is necessary or required to address and minimize through a quality approach. The states know exactly exert a strong constraint for the implementation of such approaches, and tools exist. This is the case for example in the food where it is mandatory to implement risk management, but why it would be stupid if cons-productive to declare that the food canteen is free of hazards. Such an approach would also lead to continuously analyze the absence of a health hazard for all dishes made without ever addressing the root causes: hygiene facilities, risk prevention, personnel training, batch edit, etc.. Furthermore, this approach focuses only on the control of the final product would not be able to detect new threats to prevent them.
The approach to risk management is practiced in the industry by quality professionals or those responsible for communal feeding of our example, but it is nonexistent in the field of accessibility. Why? If you've read the first article of this series, you already know that so far we are all embedded in a seductive proposition, but wrong.
The other reason is more prosaic: we have simply never been the problem this way, so we do not put in place the tools necessary to deploy this new approach.
The current toolboxIt is fine to say that it is time for a change of view of accessibility, but we do not have all the tools. To begin, we will list what is available to us to manage accessibility:
Elements technically verifiable and irrefutable: the verification of certain criteria is automated. Their implementation, too.Recommendations for improvement: WCAG exist, but other methodologies and labels that define very well the part of the objectives that are currently known.The initial recommendations on tools: ATAG give us a first set of recommendations for tools of production.Verification tools with limitations: some verification tools exist that can produce results ranging from plausible to some, or that link the existence of risks.Few monitoring tools: some verification tools also ensure follow-up. They are still rare. My-Opquast could become a tool of this type.Labels: existing labels cover part of the process focused on the search results. They never consider the appropriateness of the means. These labels will evolve, and if they do not, other labels will be created and supplant.Laws: current laws may not in any way constrain the development site accessibility. They define target levels. When will incorporate the requirements of ways, they will allow everyone to engage in the process accessibility. In 2008, it is permissible for a public site is not 100% accessible, it is however less acceptable that the process has not even been launched.The comprehensive toolboxThe toolbox full accessibility should obviously include all the above items, including labels and laws. However, to achieve an effective system to improve accessibility, two major elements are still missing the call.
A repository of resources: this document includes all the elements necessary to operate a process accessibility. It contains all the measures to be taken by an organization to measure and improve levels of accessibility, to train its staff to handle specific difficulties associated with content producers, to guarantee access to information when the technical or humans are insufficient to ensure full accessibility of content. Coupled with the requirements for production tools and content requirements for products, this document would eventually cover the entire approach accessibility. We will return the following paragraph on the content of such a document.
A certification system that takes into account the means and results: This system certifies all that is certifiable in terms of results achieved, and further certifies that the means are used to treat the whole problem, just so that the series of ISO 9000 ensures that resources are put in place to control quality.
Unfortunately in the field of accessibility, such reference does not exist. To build it, it is necessary to consider what an entity must establish as a means to improve accessibility. The possibilities are numerous, we will cite some examples of data quite beneficial for companies or services major.
How to implement this new approach?It is perfectly possible to visit a company or a public service, to check whether or not the following approach is applied:
existence and monitoring of a deployment plan or to improve accessibility;existence of audit results and subsequent improvements made;deployment of corrective actions in response to problems encountered;existence of contract reviews for accessibility (consideration of accessibility in supplier contracts);existence of training of personnel.existence of specific indicators;deployment of monitoring tools;ability to depart so framed and traceable to certain rules;calculation and mastery of measurement uncertainties;procedures exist for repairing errors reported;existence of procedures and channels to listen to the inclusion of user expectations;existence and availability of fallback;preventive and corrective actions for continuous improvement;normative monitoring and technology.All these elements are tangible. The effect on access is indirect, but the scale of two to three years, an entity that will implement this type of device will undoubtedly be more efficient in terms of accessibility that an entity having merely to request a label accessibility.
Some PerspectivesIn the previous paragraph, we tried to list the missing bricks in the process accessibility. Now have to detail them and enrich them. In practice, the possible scenarios are many.
In our case, we will continue to empower our partners to control access. Some large companies can absorb the accessibility of a regulatory element that must be integrated into the production process of sites (as may be safety and health in other areas).
The current labels may change and begin to work upstream, not only on results but on how to implement, especially in terms of management of accessibility

• Written by arun v c.
• In category Small Business.
• 13 years ago.

Hot Hits: 2511

Like it on Facebook, Tweet it or share this article on other bookmarking websites.