E-mail List Archives
Thread: IAAP
Number of posts in this thread: 10 (In chronological order)
From: Karen Sorensen
Date: Wed, Apr 30 2014 4:46PM
Subject: IAAP
No previous message | Next message →
Thanks for the thoughtful reply Paul. All I've really seen from the IAAP
though is requests for me to volunteer my time (after my regular job). So,
who's getting paid in the IAAP and what are they doing?
I definitely think the certification idea is a good one, but why is it
coming from an organization that I think was originally established by
Microsoft? Not that I'm anti-Microsoft. I'm not. But this just makes me
question the intent of IAAP.
Thanks!
Karen M. Sorensen
Accessibility Advocate for Online Courses
www.pcc.edu/access
Portland Community College
971-722-4720
*"The power of the Web is in its universality. Access by everyone
regardless of disability is an essential aspect."* Tim Berners-Lee
From: Paul Bohman
Date: Wed, Apr 30 2014 6:23PM
Subject: Re: IAAP
← Previous message | Next message →
The IAAP wasn't established by Microsoft, though Microsoft is one of the
"founding members," meaning that Microsoft paid the membership dues
necessary to be considered a founding member. The list of founding member
organizations is rather long:
http://www.accessibilityassociation.org/content.asp?contentid6 The
company that I work for is among the founding members, for example. The
initiative for forming the IAAP came primarily from ATIA, the Assistive
Technology Industry Association. I don't know all of the internal staffing
arrangements of the IAAP, but there is a list of staff on the following
page: http://www.accessibilityassociation.org/content.asp?contentid5(below
the list of board members; scroll down to the section titled "IAAP
Staff Team"). At this point the IAAP staff are mostly facilitating the
process of getting a professional organization started, and acting as
facilitators in the various committees, without actually being in charge of
them. Individuals who are not IAAP employees head the committees.
Paul Bohman, PhD
Director of Training
Deque Systems, Inc
www.deque.com
703-225-0380, ext.121
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 6:46 PM, Karen Sorensen < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >wrote:
> Thanks for the thoughtful reply Paul. All I've really seen from the IAAP
> though is requests for me to volunteer my time (after my regular job). So,
> who's getting paid in the IAAP and what are they doing?
> I definitely think the certification idea is a good one, but why is it
> coming from an organization that I think was originally established by
> Microsoft? Not that I'm anti-Microsoft. I'm not. But this just makes me
> question the intent of IAAP.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Karen M. Sorensen
> Accessibility Advocate for Online Courses
> www.pcc.edu/access
> Portland Community College
> 971-722-4720
> *"The power of the Web is in its universality. Access by everyone
> regardless of disability is an essential aspect."* Tim Berners-Lee
> > > >
From: John Foliot
Date: Fri, May 09 2014 12:24PM
Subject: Re: Questions about the International Association of Accessibility Professionals (IAAP)
← Previous message | Next message →
An Open Letter to the Board of Directors of the International Association of
Accessibility Professionals (IAAP)
Hello.
Upon recently reviewing of the IAAP website, and your Bylaws & Policies
http://www.accessibilityassociation.org/content.asp?contentid=239#A3%20S3 I
have a question or 2 that I am unable to find answers to. It is my hope that
you can answer them here for both myself and the community, as well as
update your website with the (what I believe to be important) information I
am seeking.
*************
Voting Rights
(http://www.accessibilityassociation.org/content.asp?contentid=239#A3%20S3)
Your website states: "Section 3. Voting Rights - Each member having voting
rights shall be entitled to one vote on each matter submitted to a vote of
the members having voting rights."
Outside of the somewhat circular logic and nonsense speak offered there
(paraphrase: those who can vote get to vote whenever there is a vote), I
cannot find anywhere on your site *WHICH* members have voting rights, and
how those voting rights are acquired. (I am concerned with the phrase "... a
vote of the members having voting rights", which somehow implies that not
all members will have those rights...)
* Does every (paid) member have a voting right? One member, one vote? (How
does the initial "first year free" for individual members impact this?)
* Or is voting restricted to corporate membership only?
* If it is one member, one vote, how are corporate memberships handled? Does
a Standard Corporate membership (20 members) accrue 20 votes? Silver gets 40
votes? Platinum 120 votes? (I strikes me that one way to stack the deck is
to buy your way to the table) - what mechanisms are in place to ensure that
the rank-and-file individual Professional member's voice and vote is heard
equitably?
*************
** Use of IAAP logo and "implications" based upon Membership
What rules, requirements and/or restrictions apply to the use of the IAAP
logo?
[scenario]
The XYZ Company (registered in Delaware, or maybe Nevada <wink>), has
recently released the "5-Zero-8 Wonder Widget (TM)", a software tool so
powerful and awesome that the proprietary technologies involved are patented
(see:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/05/09/amazon_granted_patent_for_taking_pho
tos_against_a_white_background/).
This "Wonder Widget" will, amongst other things, continually scan your
website, finding and fixing every accessibility problem known to man, after
which it will fold your clean laundry, take the trash to the curb, and on
Fridays give you a relaxing back rub.
Excited at the lucrative business opportunities this new technology
represents, the owner of the XYZ Company purchases a membership to the IAAP,
and then proudly displays the IAAP logo on their website.
After an independent review of the accessibility claims proffered by this
amazing tool, it is discovered that one of the instant fixes is to
automatically find all images and insert or replace all alt values with
alt="", ensuring that each and every image on the page and site has a valid
(if null) alt attribute! (It is also discovered that all of your socks are
mis-matched, and it gives a lousy back rub...)
[end of scenario]
* What mechanism is in place to ensure that such an abuse of the IAAP logo
can be avoided?
* How does the IAAP plan on addressing the implication that simply
purchasing a membership to the IAAP in no way constitutes or implies
credence to the idea that the purchaser has any real or valid/valuable
accessibility relevance?
* Is there (or will there be) a public registry of members of the IAAP
(perhaps with "reviews" or referrals)? Or will the IAAP operate similar to
the Better Business Bureau, where you "register", display the logo, and as
long as no-one has complained (and sometimes even if they have), you get to
claim to be part of the BBB?
* Article 3, Section 6 of the bylaws notes a mechanism to revoke membership
from agents clearly seeking to benefit on the goodwill of the IAAP name,
without providing the value that this implication may afford. However, again
details are foggy: if they "purchased" membership, will they be
re-reimbursed? Fully, pro-rated, none?
To be perfectly candid and clear, I support the idea of applying
professional rigor to the profession of which I am a part of. The need for a
transparent mechanism to identify qualified practitioners of our trade (or
is it Craft?) is increasing daily, there is an identified gap between the
numbers of professionals needed, and the supply of said professionals, and
the goal of addressing those needs is laudable. Before I participate in any
professional activity however, I owe it to myself, and my own sense of
professionalism, to do my due diligence and ensure that any investment I
make toward a professional association is in keeping with my current
personal standards of equitability and transparency.
I thank you in advance for the answers to the questions I pose today. I am
sure that there will be more, either from myself or others, and I look
forward to continued progress and success of this initiative.
Sincerely,
JF
------------------------------
John Foliot
Web Accessibility Specialist
W3C Invited Expert - Accessibility
Co-Founder, Open Web Camp
From: Paul Bohman
Date: Fri, May 09 2014 2:03PM
Subject: Re: Questions about the International Association of Accessibility Professionals (IAAP)
← Previous message | Next message →
Excellent questions, John. I am involved as the certification committee
chair with IAAP, but I have not been involved in either of the two
decisions that you ask about, so I will have to leave it to others do
address your questions, but I agree those questions are worth asking, and
they can have important consequences.
Perhaps a follow-up question to you would be: How would you prefer to
handle these scenarios? It's entirely possible that the IAAP has not yet
finalized all of those details (I'm sure they'll correct me if I'm wrong on
this), and that it will look to the community to offer their input. What
input would you offer?
Paul Bohman, PhD
Director of Training
Deque Systems, Inc
www.deque.com
703-225-0380, ext.121
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 2:24 PM, John Foliot < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> An Open Letter to the Board of Directors of the International Association
> of
> Accessibility Professionals (IAAP)
>
> Hello.
>
> Upon recently reviewing of the IAAP website, and your Bylaws & Policies
> http://www.accessibilityassociation.org/content.asp?contentid=239#A3%20S3I
> have a question or 2 that I am unable to find answers to. It is my hope
> that
> you can answer them here for both myself and the community, as well as
> update your website with the (what I believe to be important) information I
> am seeking.
>
> *************
>
> Voting Rights
> (http://www.accessibilityassociation.org/content.asp?contentid=239#A3%20S3
> )
>
> Your website states: "Section 3. Voting Rights - Each member having voting
> rights shall be entitled to one vote on each matter submitted to a vote of
> the members having voting rights."
>
> Outside of the somewhat circular logic and nonsense speak offered there
> (paraphrase: those who can vote get to vote whenever there is a vote), I
> cannot find anywhere on your site *WHICH* members have voting rights, and
> how those voting rights are acquired. (I am concerned with the phrase "...
> a
> vote of the members having voting rights", which somehow implies that not
> all members will have those rights...)
>
> * Does every (paid) member have a voting right? One member, one vote? (How
> does the initial "first year free" for individual members impact this?)
> * Or is voting restricted to corporate membership only?
> * If it is one member, one vote, how are corporate memberships handled?
> Does
> a Standard Corporate membership (20 members) accrue 20 votes? Silver gets
> 40
> votes? Platinum 120 votes? (I strikes me that one way to stack the deck is
> to buy your way to the table) - what mechanisms are in place to ensure that
> the rank-and-file individual Professional member's voice and vote is heard
> equitably?
>
> *************
>
> ** Use of IAAP logo and "implications" based upon Membership
>
> What rules, requirements and/or restrictions apply to the use of the IAAP
> logo?
>
> [scenario]
>
> The XYZ Company (registered in Delaware, or maybe Nevada <wink>), has
> recently released the "5-Zero-8 Wonder Widget (TM)", a software tool so
> powerful and awesome that the proprietary technologies involved are
> patented
> (see:
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/05/09/amazon_granted_patent_for_taking_pho
> tos_against_a_white_background/).
>
> This "Wonder Widget" will, amongst other things, continually scan your
> website, finding and fixing every accessibility problem known to man, after
> which it will fold your clean laundry, take the trash to the curb, and on
> Fridays give you a relaxing back rub.
>
> Excited at the lucrative business opportunities this new technology
> represents, the owner of the XYZ Company purchases a membership to the
> IAAP,
> and then proudly displays the IAAP logo on their website.
>
> After an independent review of the accessibility claims proffered by this
> amazing tool, it is discovered that one of the instant fixes is to
> automatically find all images and insert or replace all alt values with
> alt="", ensuring that each and every image on the page and site has a valid
> (if null) alt attribute! (It is also discovered that all of your socks are
> mis-matched, and it gives a lousy back rub...)
>
> [end of scenario]
>
> * What mechanism is in place to ensure that such an abuse of the IAAP logo
> can be avoided?
> * How does the IAAP plan on addressing the implication that simply
> purchasing a membership to the IAAP in no way constitutes or implies
> credence to the idea that the purchaser has any real or valid/valuable
> accessibility relevance?
> * Is there (or will there be) a public registry of members of the IAAP
> (perhaps with "reviews" or referrals)? Or will the IAAP operate similar to
> the Better Business Bureau, where you "register", display the logo, and as
> long as no-one has complained (and sometimes even if they have), you get to
> claim to be part of the BBB?
> * Article 3, Section 6 of the bylaws notes a mechanism to revoke membership
> from agents clearly seeking to benefit on the goodwill of the IAAP name,
> without providing the value that this implication may afford. However,
> again
> details are foggy: if they "purchased" membership, will they be
> re-reimbursed? Fully, pro-rated, none?
>
>
> To be perfectly candid and clear, I support the idea of applying
> professional rigor to the profession of which I am a part of. The need for
> a
> transparent mechanism to identify qualified practitioners of our trade (or
> is it Craft?) is increasing daily, there is an identified gap between the
> numbers of professionals needed, and the supply of said professionals, and
> the goal of addressing those needs is laudable. Before I participate in any
> professional activity however, I owe it to myself, and my own sense of
> professionalism, to do my due diligence and ensure that any investment I
> make toward a professional association is in keeping with my current
> personal standards of equitability and transparency.
>
> I thank you in advance for the answers to the questions I pose today. I am
> sure that there will be more, either from myself or others, and I look
> forward to continued progress and success of this initiative.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> JF
> ------------------------------
> John Foliot
> Web Accessibility Specialist
> W3C Invited Expert - Accessibility
> Co-Founder, Open Web Camp
>
>
>
>
>
> > > >
From: John Foliot
Date: Fri, May 09 2014 4:00PM
Subject: Re: Questions about the International Association of Accessibility Professionals (IAAP)
← Previous message | Next message →
Hi Phil,
Thanks for jumping in. I think our community needs to continue to have
these discussions.
I'd like to examine your comments a little closer:
benefits include:
Eligible to participate in committees and task forces
Q: Committees and task forces to do what? The IAAP's current mission
statement states:
"The mission of the International Association of Accessibility Professionals
(IAAP) is to define, promote and improve the accessibility profession
globally through networking, education and certification in order to enable
the creation of accessible products, content and services."
At the risk of sounding negative, I read three action items there:
networking, education, certification (where education and certification seem
to be intrinsically linked), so, outside of a committee working on
networking, and one on education and certification, what other committees
and task forces could you envision for this association? (It seems that
currently the scope of this organization is relatively small and focused -
certification and education.)
Happily open to ideas however (as I am sure is the current Board of
Directors).
"Examples of when if ever all the individual IAAP members would
ever vote on anything"
Article 6 of the Bylaws and Policies
(http://www.accessibilityassociation.org/content.asp?contentid=239#A6)
states:
"Directors shall be elected by the members at the annual meeting
of the members, or as soon thereafter as conveniently possible."
It occurs to me that any association of professionals that comes together
would have, at its core, a key goal of the association reflecting the values
and desires of its membership - its community. This is why I am also asking
about who constitutes a voting member: if the only members who get to vote
are large corporations who purchase one of the corporate memberships, what
does that mean to the rank-and-file members who may not have corporate
backing? Will they have a say in how *their* association is run, or will it
be dictated to them by corporate overseers?
The association is not "selling" anything (except maybe it's going to sell
education packages - or should those packages be developed by and for the
membership, and shared freely amongst the members?), so there is no Profit
and Loss deliberations to consider (although financial management of the
association *would* be a consideration - they are managing *our* money and
dues after all).
The association is not creating standards or policy for any group outside of
its own members (is it? not according to the mission statement) - with
perhaps the exception of a "certification" process which hopefully would be
recognized 'internationally' as a certification worthy of its name. Given
the importance of *that* effort to this association, I would hope that both
consensus AND voting would come into play.
So I would think that ensuring that the right people are at the helm, to
ensure that the association DOES reflect the desires and will of its
membership, would be something the general membership would want to vote on
- I know *I* would want to do that.
"For example, consider a tiered approach, like at the W3C, where
working groups are operated by chairs that try to reach consensus rather
than voting all the time."
Interestingly, the organizational structure of the W3C is actually one that
I am quite well acquainted with. While the *work* of the W3C Working Groups
operate under a consensus model, there *is* an annual membership meeting
(TPAC - held this year in Santa Clara: http://www.w3.org/2014/11/TPAC/),
where members of the Advisory Committee meet behind closed doors to discuss
W3C business, and where consensus and voting does take place. Minutes of
those meetings ARE NOT public, and are only available to the (paid)
membership of the W3C.
One aspect of the AC worth noting is that every paid member to the W3C has
one AC Rep (ergo, 1 vote), no matter whether they are
Microsoft/Google/Apple/IBM or WilliesWebWonders, a small 2 person web
development shop who chose to be paid members of the W3C. There is a certain
egalitarianism to that model that *could* be adopted by the IAAP, but
currently we don't know who gets to vote, or how the votes are counted. And
outside of any work coming from either the "networking committee" or the
"education and certification committee", we really don't know today what
else *might* be voted on (but it is my guess at this writing that many would
want to have a "voting" say on a certification program and an educational
curriculum).
Again, I applaud the efforts to date to stand up a Professional Association
for our industry. The time is right to be doing so, and the need is readily
apparent. But like everything, the devil is in the details, and as I
investigate whether the IAAP is right for me, I will continue to ask
questions to get those details, so that I can make an informed decision.
Cheers!
JF
From: Phill Jenkins [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
Sent: Friday, May 9, 2014 1:58 PM
To: John Foliot
Cc: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ;
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Subject: Re: Questions about the International Association of Accessibility
Professionals (IAAP)
A few things to consider in this thread:
1. By-Laws vs Member benefits
2. Examples from other associations and consortiums
3. Examples of when if ever all the individual IAAP members would ever vote
on anything
1. IAAP Member benefits include:
Eligible to participate in committees and task forces
http://www.accessibilityassociation.org/content.asp?contentid=153
I recommend including some level of "voting benefits" to the list of
benefits, but scope it (limit the scope with example) as in vote on
committees and task forces. And give some example of when if ever the
general membership of the IAAP would ever vote on anything.
2. Use example from other associations, such as the W3C
For example, consider a tiered approach, like at the W3C, where working
groups are operated by chairs that try to reach consensus rather than voting
all the time.
See
<http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#Votes>;
http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#Votes
and distinguish between if and when groups of members that get to vote and
groups of members that don't vote - meaning the same members can vote and at
other times the same members don't get to vote. So, although all members
get to nominate and vote on who gets to be on the Advisory Committee, only
members on the Advisory Committee get to vote on things the Advisory votes
on [smile].
See the section describes general policies for W3C groups regarding
participation, meeting requirements, and decision-making. These policies
apply to participants in the following groups: Advisory Committee
<http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#AC>; , Advisory
Board
<http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#ABParticipatio
n> , TAG
<http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#tag-participat
ion> , Working Groups
<http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/groups.html#wgparticipant>; ,
Interest Groups
<http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/groups.html#igparticipant>; , and
Coordination Groups
<http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/groups.html#cgparticipant>; .
3. Examples of when all the IAAP indivisual members would vote on something?
I can't think of any. I've never heard of a vote of all individual members
of the W3C (companies get to vote once in a while, but not individuals) , or
IEEE members, or even the ACM members that I can remember. I do get to vote
at the annual IBM Stockholder's meeting, based on the number of shares I
have - but that is a business model, not a democracy government model of one
citizen one vote. At the annual stockholders meeting the deck is stacked,
but so is the vested interest. Even as a citizen I do not get to vote on
everything - for example I do not get to vote at the Senate Committee
meetings or the local Citiy Council meetings. I wouldn't expect IAAP
members to get to vote on something like raising the membership fee - that's
the job of the board and/or CEO and staff. OK, maybe, just maybe I could see
IAAP having a popularity vote on a new logo competition or something like
that. . .
but
if we're talking about a scenario where there is an IAAP committee or task
force that can't reach consensus, and the chair has to call for a vote of
the members participating, then should all the members participating get to
vote, even if those members come from the same company, government,
non-profit agency, country, or group of independent consultants? Yes, in my
opinion becasue IAAP is not a consortium, but an association. In the
W3C's process, the group of invited experts only gets one vote for their
group. In IAAP every individual member pays a individual membership fee.
The payment may come from either themselves or their employer pays for them,
or via your tax dollars, or by scholarship - however it doesn't matter who
or how its paid - its about whether the individual is a member or the
organization is a member. Because the individual is the member
(representing themselves, not the company, not the government agency, not
the country they live in, not the non-profit, and not the group of
independent consultants) each member gets a vote, if or when ever one is
called. Which is what I think the by-law is saying.
See W3C's guidance on 3.3.1. Managing Dissent
<http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#managing-dissent>;
http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#managing-dissent
Regards,
Phill Jenkins,
From: John Foliot
Date: Fri, May 09 2014 6:07PM
Subject: Re: Questions about the International Association of Accessibility Professionals (IAAP)
← Previous message | Next message →
Paul Bohman wrote:
>
> Perhaps a follow-up question to you would be: How would you prefer to
> handle these scenarios? It's entirely possible that the IAAP has not
> yet finalized all of those details (I'm sure they'll correct me if I'm
> wrong on this), and that it will look to the community to offer their
> input. What input would you offer?
>
Hi Paul,
With regard to voting:
I am expressing my concern that the Bylaws today set out conditions
when voting can happen, and makes mention of members with voting ability,
but does not define who those members are. Surely when whomever was creating
and reviewing the Bylaws and Constitution of the organization started
talking about voting, they knew who they were talking about (if they
weren't, then that opens up a whole different set of concerns). The history
of the IAAP has long suffered from an apparent lack of transparency to the
larger community, going back at least 3 years now, and at this point I would
certainly hope they heard those concerns.
Giving them the benefit of the doubt however, I think you can surmise from
my initial posting how I think voting should be addressed: each member gets
one vote. I further think that the W3C model (which Phill Jenkins noted in
passing) of each corporate member having one representative vote, to avoid
block or cluster "voting" would be a valuable position to take: it ensures
that the grass-roots has as much a say in the direction and organization of
the association as do deep-pocketed corporate sponsors. Pragmatically,
larger sponsors will have the ear and attention of the board of directors,
which will certainly help ensure that the association recognizes and
responds to "industry needs", but by keeping the organization in the hands
of the direct members, there is a checks-and-balances there of significant
value.
Regarding any implied meaning from membership, and protecting the IAAP's
logo and reputation:
Again, a careful read of my questions should give you an idea on how
*I* would proceed. I think a publicly posted "members in good standing"
page, coupled with some form of referrals or satisfaction tracking mechanism
would be beneficial. I'd bristle at a "Yelp" style ranking/rating system
(I've heard too many stories to lend any credibility to Yelp in my mind),
but like the Better Business Bureau, tracking if there have been any
complaints or issues with paid members would serve as a means of keeping the
membership "honest". Proceeding along a path like that would require a
process and perhaps even an arbitration mechanism, and/but that might be a
useful mechanism for the association to pursue - expanding the role of the
association beyond just a training and certification enterprise.
I would also have a publicly posted "terms of usage" page outlining
explicitly how and where the IAAP logo can be used, and clear and obvious
explanation to any and all that the usage of the IAAP logo is in no way an
endorsement of a company, service or tool. I don't see that on the web site
today, and a search for the term "logo" on the IAAP's site returns no
results. Taking this idea further, the same page could provide suitable
downloadable logos in multiple graphics formats and sizes (SVG, PNG, AI,
etc.) similar to (if not as sophisticated as) this:
http://www.w3.org/html/logo/
Thoughts?
JF
From: John Foliot
Date: Fri, May 09 2014 7:31PM
Subject: Re: Questions about the International Association of Accessibility Professionals (IAAP)
← Previous message | Next message →
Hi Rob,
Thanks for responding. A few comments inline:
> The language used to define voting rights is typical boilerplate
> language intended to cover multiple eventualities. We adopted this
> common language to provide flexibility for the organization as it
> grows.
Given that a clear definition of who can and cannot vote is not apparent or
present in the current boiler-plate language, and thus not on the site, can
we anticipate that this oversight can be corrected soon?
> As Phil said, the IAAP is an association of individuals, some of whom
> happen to have their membership fee paid by their employer. There is no
> mechanism for an organization to vote on behalf of its individual members;
> that is something each member must do on their own.
...although it still sets the stage for block voting by corporate
affiliation, facilitated by bulk membership purchases (put simply, if my
manager "facilitates" my membership, and she likes "Red", then I will be
inclined to vote "Red", because, well, my manager is my manager...).
I don't have an easy answer to this, but it remains a concern. I think it
would be useful to hear the Board of Director's thoughts on this
possibility, and potential mitigating strategies. By now I am sure you have
well heard the concerns over "big industry" taking things over from what has
been to date a vibrant but often grass-roots community, and steps to assuage
the fears that a company could come in and write the agenda would be a
valuable exercise.
> You also asked about the IAAP logo. Display of the logo only reflects
> membership - it does not represent endorsement or guarantee of that
> individual's product.
As I noted to Paul Bohman, I personally think the association needs to do
more here - to be more explicit.
One of the reasons stated for ensuring some degree of assurance that the
services and expertise of any organization or individual has some
credibility was because of the "bottom feeders" and "snake oil salesmen"
that are starting to surface in the emergent expertise vacuum. If I was
unfamiliar with the professional space that is our industry, and saw that
icon being used on a service providers site, I could be forgiven for
construing that the company had a level of expertise and professionalism
(whether that was true or not) - a problem my colleague Derek Featherstone
noted over 8 years ago
(http://v1.boxofchocolates.ca/archives/2006/02/02/four-steps-to-becoming-an-
accessibility-consultant).
But if I went to the IAAP site and it was crystal clear what usage of that
logo meant, then as a purchaser of services and expertise I would be better
informed (which is also one of the stated goals of the association, right?
To aid industry seeking our professional expertise?) Since adding some kind
of statement to the website is relatively trivial in the grand scheme of
things, I would hope that it could become a priority for the association
fairly soon.
> This is also typical usage of membership logos -
> common practice that we are following.
<smile>, Rob, by now should be well aware that what we do is hardly
"common". I will suggest to you that while it might be common in many
industries and associations, it has the very real potential to serve us
poorly. I honestly think this should be something the Board of Directors
discuss further, and act upon. Public feedback sought, public feedback
provided.
> I'm happy to jump on a call next week to discuss further, if you have
> additional questions.
>
> Rob
Thanks for the generous offer Rob, and I am always happy to have a chat with
you, however I think it would be more valuable if we continue these
conversations in a public forum (and BTW WebAIM and WAI-IG, thanks for
letting me use your bandwidth). I am and remain a strong advocate of
transparency and public discourse.
Cheers!
JF
From: Léonie Watson
Date: Sat, May 10 2014 8:28AM
Subject: Re: Questions about the International Association ofAccessibility Professionals (IAAP)
← Previous message | Next message →
John Foliot wrote:
"At the risk of sounding negative, I read three action items there:
networking, education, certification (where education and certification seem
to be intrinsically linked), so, outside of a committee working on
networking, and one on education and certification, what other committees
and task forces could you envision for this association? (It seems that
currently the scope of this organization is relatively small and focused -
certification and education.)"
My understanding is that IAAP members will be able to create communities
that focus on specific topics, should they wish. I'm not sure of the finer
points of how you'd go about doing that right now, but the connections area
of the IAAP site will facilitate this (when it goes live) with resources
like homepage, wiki, email list etc.
I don't think we should be looking at the IAAP board to suggest which
communities are set up under the IAAP umbrella. I'd be much happier if those
ideas came from the grassroots of the industry.
Léonie.
--
@LeonieWatson Carpe diem.
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of John Foliot
Sent: 09 May 2014 23:01
To: 'Phill Jenkins'
Cc: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ;
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Questions about the International Association of
Accessibility Professionals (IAAP)
Hi Phil,
Thanks for jumping in. I think our community needs to continue to have
these discussions.
I'd like to examine your comments a little closer:
benefits include:
Eligible to participate in committees and task forces
Q: Committees and task forces to do what? The IAAP's current mission
statement states:
"The mission of the International Association of Accessibility Professionals
(IAAP) is to define, promote and improve the accessibility profession
globally through networking, education and certification in order to enable
the creation of accessible products, content and services."
At the risk of sounding negative, I read three action items there:
networking, education, certification (where education and certification seem
to be intrinsically linked), so, outside of a committee working on
networking, and one on education and certification, what other committees
and task forces could you envision for this association? (It seems that
currently the scope of this organization is relatively small and focused -
certification and education.)
Happily open to ideas however (as I am sure is the current Board of
Directors).
"Examples of when if ever all the individual IAAP members would
ever vote on anything"
Article 6 of the Bylaws and Policies
(http://www.accessibilityassociation.org/content.asp?contentid=239#A6)
states:
"Directors shall be elected by the members at the annual meeting
of the members, or as soon thereafter as conveniently possible."
It occurs to me that any association of professionals that comes together
would have, at its core, a key goal of the association reflecting the values
and desires of its membership - its community. This is why I am also asking
about who constitutes a voting member: if the only members who get to vote
are large corporations who purchase one of the corporate memberships, what
does that mean to the rank-and-file members who may not have corporate
backing? Will they have a say in how *their* association is run, or will it
be dictated to them by corporate overseers?
The association is not "selling" anything (except maybe it's going to sell
education packages - or should those packages be developed by and for the
membership, and shared freely amongst the members?), so there is no Profit
and Loss deliberations to consider (although financial management of the
association *would* be a consideration - they are managing *our* money and
dues after all).
The association is not creating standards or policy for any group outside of
its own members (is it? not according to the mission statement) - with
perhaps the exception of a "certification" process which hopefully would be
recognized 'internationally' as a certification worthy of its name. Given
the importance of *that* effort to this association, I would hope that both
consensus AND voting would come into play.
So I would think that ensuring that the right people are at the helm, to
ensure that the association DOES reflect the desires and will of its
membership, would be something the general membership would want to vote on
- I know *I* would want to do that.
"For example, consider a tiered approach, like at the W3C, where
working groups are operated by chairs that try to reach consensus rather
than voting all the time."
Interestingly, the organizational structure of the W3C is actually one that
I am quite well acquainted with. While the *work* of the W3C Working Groups
operate under a consensus model, there *is* an annual membership meeting
(TPAC - held this year in Santa Clara: http://www.w3.org/2014/11/TPAC/),
where members of the Advisory Committee meet behind closed doors to discuss
W3C business, and where consensus and voting does take place. Minutes of
those meetings ARE NOT public, and are only available to the (paid)
membership of the W3C.
One aspect of the AC worth noting is that every paid member to the W3C has
one AC Rep (ergo, 1 vote), no matter whether they are
Microsoft/Google/Apple/IBM or WilliesWebWonders, a small 2 person web
development shop who chose to be paid members of the W3C. There is a certain
egalitarianism to that model that *could* be adopted by the IAAP, but
currently we don't know who gets to vote, or how the votes are counted. And
outside of any work coming from either the "networking committee" or the
"education and certification committee", we really don't know today what
else *might* be voted on (but it is my guess at this writing that many would
want to have a "voting" say on a certification program and an educational
curriculum).
Again, I applaud the efforts to date to stand up a Professional Association
for our industry. The time is right to be doing so, and the need is readily
apparent. But like everything, the devil is in the details, and as I
investigate whether the IAAP is right for me, I will continue to ask
questions to get those details, so that I can make an informed decision.
Cheers!
JF
From: Phill Jenkins [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
Sent: Friday, May 9, 2014 1:58 PM
To: John Foliot
Cc: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ;
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Subject: Re: Questions about the International Association of Accessibility
Professionals (IAAP)
A few things to consider in this thread:
1. By-Laws vs Member benefits
2. Examples from other associations and consortiums 3. Examples of when if
ever all the individual IAAP members would ever vote on anything
1. IAAP Member benefits include:
Eligible to participate in committees and task forces
http://www.accessibilityassociation.org/content.asp?contentid=153
I recommend including some level of "voting benefits" to the list of
benefits, but scope it (limit the scope with example) as in vote on
committees and task forces. And give some example of when if ever the
general membership of the IAAP would ever vote on anything.
2. Use example from other associations, such as the W3C
For example, consider a tiered approach, like at the W3C, where working
groups are operated by chairs that try to reach consensus rather than voting
all the time.
See
<http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#Votes>;
http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#Votes
and distinguish between if and when groups of members that get to vote and
groups of members that don't vote - meaning the same members can vote and at
other times the same members don't get to vote. So, although all members
get to nominate and vote on who gets to be on the Advisory Committee, only
members on the Advisory Committee get to vote on things the Advisory votes
on [smile].
See the section describes general policies for W3C groups regarding
participation, meeting requirements, and decision-making. These policies
apply to participants in the following groups: Advisory Committee
<http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#AC>; , Advisory
Board
<http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#ABParticipatio
n> , TAG
<http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#tag-participat
ion> , Working Groups
<http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/groups.html#wgparticipant>; ,
Interest Groups
<http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/groups.html#igparticipant>; , and
Coordination Groups
<http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/groups.html#cgparticipant>; .
3. Examples of when all the IAAP indivisual members would vote on something?
I can't think of any. I've never heard of a vote of all individual members
of the W3C (companies get to vote once in a while, but not individuals) , or
IEEE members, or even the ACM members that I can remember. I do get to vote
at the annual IBM Stockholder's meeting, based on the number of shares I
have - but that is a business model, not a democracy government model of one
citizen one vote. At the annual stockholders meeting the deck is stacked,
but so is the vested interest. Even as a citizen I do not get to vote on
everything - for example I do not get to vote at the Senate Committee
meetings or the local Citiy Council meetings. I wouldn't expect IAAP
members to get to vote on something like raising the membership fee - that's
the job of the board and/or CEO and staff. OK, maybe, just maybe I could see
IAAP having a popularity vote on a new logo competition or something like
that. . .
but
if we're talking about a scenario where there is an IAAP committee or task
force that can't reach consensus, and the chair has to call for a vote of
the members participating, then should all the members participating get to
vote, even if those members come from the same company, government,
non-profit agency, country, or group of independent consultants? Yes, in my
opinion becasue IAAP is not a consortium, but an association. In the
W3C's process, the group of invited experts only gets one vote for their
group. In IAAP every individual member pays a individual membership fee.
The payment may come from either themselves or their employer pays for them,
or via your tax dollars, or by scholarship - however it doesn't matter who
or how its paid - its about whether the individual is a member or the
organization is a member. Because the individual is the member
(representing themselves, not the company, not the government agency, not
the country they live in, not the non-profit, and not the group of
independent consultants) each member gets a vote, if or when ever one is
called. Which is what I think the by-law is saying.
See W3C's guidance on 3.3.1. Managing Dissent
<http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#managing-dissent>;
http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#managing-dissent
Regards,
Phill Jenkins,
messages to = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
From: John Foliot
Date: Sat, May 10 2014 12:08PM
Subject: Re: Questions about the International Association of Accessibility Professionals (IAAP)
← Previous message | Next message →
Léonie Watson wrote:
>
> John Foliot wrote:
> > so, outside of a committee working on
> > networking, and one on education and certification, what other
> > committees and task forces could you envision for this association?
>
> My understanding is that IAAP members will be able to create
> communities that focus on specific topics, should they wish. I'm not
> sure of the finer points of how you'd go about doing that right now,
> but the connections area of the IAAP site will facilitate this (when it
> goes live) with resources like homepage, wiki, email list etc.
>
> I don't think we should be looking at the IAAP board to suggest which
> communities are set up under the IAAP umbrella. I'd be much happier if
> those ideas came from the grassroots of the industry.
Hi Léonie,
While I can certainly agree with that sentiment, do we have any indication
that there is a need for such a mechanism? Has anyone stepped forward and
suggested "we should form a committee or task force about X,Y,Z, if only
there were a place to do so"? Within the very limited scope of the IAAP
Mission Statement (or even looking beyond), has anyone proposed *any* ideas
in this area? It is well and good to suggest that a framework for doing this
will be created within the IAAP, but without a clear need, what will stop
this from being yet another empty box? (I hate that this even sounds
negative, but it is also a pragmatic and realistic question)
I think as well that there already exists today numerous forums independent
of IAAP where like minded professionals in our space already gather. One
such place, that you and I are very familiar with, is the W3C.
Recently, the W3C set about on an experiment very similar to this one, with
the creation of their "Community Groups" (http://www.w3.org/community/).
While focused on the much broader topic of "web technologies", within that
framework (which includes dedicated mailing lists, dedicated wiki space,
etc.) there emerged a number of groups looking at various accessibility
related topics. Here are a few of them:
* Accessible Infographics
(39 participants, goal: The goal of the Accessible Infographics CG
is to make information graphics, like bar charts and maps, as accessible as
possible to all, activity: none since 7/2012)
* Accessible SVG
(26 participants, goal: This group will explore the different
conditions and circumstances for SVG use, propose clear use cases and
requirements and specification text, and make tests so we can have
consistent behavior in various user agents (including different screen
readers), activity: none since 8/2013)
* CSS Accessibility
(48 participants, goal: Document and describe how browsers and
assistive technology currently implement CSS in regards to accessibility and
guidance on how they should, activity: none since 6/2012)
* Mobile Accessibility
(40 participants, goal: The mission of this group is the discussion
and investigation of the intersection of mobile and accessibility, activity:
none since 10/2012)
...and, you get the point. And remember, participation in any of the above
groups does not require a paid membership, you need only to simply show up
and start contributing.
Looking elsewhere, within the higher education sector in the US, there are
also groups such as ATHEN (http://www.athenpro.org/) and AHEAD
(https://www.ahead.org/), with at least one of those groups (as I understand
it) struggling to retain membership and remain relevant and useful in 2014.
The reality is simply this: the "idea" of groups is far stronger than the
outcome of that idea. There are plenty of 'committees and task-forces' today
that exist on paper, but produce little more. How and what will the IAAP do
differently to overcome that problem?
(Note: I freely admit I don't have an answer to that question. But if the
current Board of the IAAP believe that providing the "connections area", so
that committees and task-forces can spring forth and operate, is an
important part of what the IAAP is offering its members, then I believe this
remains a valid question.)
JF
From: Léonie Watson
Date: Sat, May 10 2014 3:08PM
Subject: Re: Questions about the International Association of Accessibility Professionals (IAAP)
← Previous message | No next message
John Foliot wrote:
"... do we have any indication that there is a need for such a mechanism?
Has anyone stepped forward and suggested "we should form a committee or task
force about X,Y,Z, if only there were a place to do so"? Within the very
limited scope of the IAAP Mission Statement (or even looking beyond), has
anyone proposed *any* ideas in this area? It is well and good to suggest
that a framework for doing this will be created within the IAAP, but without
a clear need, what will stop this from being yet another empty box? (I hate
that this even sounds negative, but it is also a pragmatic and realistic
question)"
One possibility is to foster local accessibility groups. There has been some
success in the US with this, but it's something that has far greater
potential than is being realised at the moment. The IAAP won't suddenly
change that, but it's quite possible that people will think a good place to
start a group for local accessibility professionals, is under the auspices
of an international association of accessibility professionals, rather than
trying something on their own.
That's perhaps something else worth thinking about. It's relatively easy for
those of us who are engaged with the accessibility community to start
something, draw people together and work on some initiative. For the people
less engaged, less plugged into the community if you like, it probably isn't
that easy. If someone like that has an idea, doing it as an IAAP group could
seem like a good way to get started, and to reach a lot more potential
participants than their own networks might permit.
"I think as well that there already exists today numerous forums independent
of IAAP where like minded professionals in our space already gather. One
such place, that you and I are very familiar with, is the W3C."
Very true, and I can't think of a better place for those kinds of groups to
be based. But what what about communities outside of the web or without a
purely technical focus?
Project managers who want to identify the best way to embed accessibility
into agile methodologies, graphic designers who think it would be useful to
develop guidelines for maintaining accessibility in the switch between
digital and physical media, UX practitioners who want to draw up a manifesto
for usability testing with disabled people, web managers who want to look at
practical steps for creating and implementing organisational accessibility
strategies. Just a few ideas, possibly some of them already being done
someplace I don't know about, but getting into the weeds of specific
examples isn't the point.
"The reality is simply this: the "idea" of groups is far stronger than the
outcome of that idea. There are plenty of 'committees and task-forces' today
that exist on paper, but produce little more. How and what will the IAAP do
differently to overcome that problem?"
True, but there are also groups that accomplish a great deal. As to what the
IAAP will do to overcome the "paper group" problem, I don't know. That said,
in my experience the success of a group rarely has much to do with the board
of the organisation, and far more to do with the people who are active
participants in those groups.
I'm glad you're asking these questions John. The steps our industry takes
should be a matter for discussion by the industry at large,and the more
people that get involved in these conversations the better. Keep it up my
friend.
Léonie.