Web 2.0

Web Accessibility and the Law - EU Part I

Sun, 30 Nov 2008 22:46:38 +0530

Continuing our discussion on the laws dealing with web accessibility around the world, this blog focuses on the legislations and regulations in the European Union (EU). It should be mentioned here that the European countries have been one of the key funding contributors (besides US and Japan) to the Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) of the Worldwide Web Consortium (W3C). To that extent there is an acceptance of the recommendations of the WAI across the EU. But the efforts are not limited only to passive contribution to the WAI. The EU has independently adopted several recommendations from councils and commissions set up especially to address the issue of an inclusive global information society.

Web Accessibility and the Law - India

Thu, 27 Nov 2008 22:53:29 +0530

I would really like to thank Vijay Krishnamani for his comment on the previous post. Essentially, because it helped me dedicate this post only for the law in India. Vijay, thanks for your interest in the post and also for your question. Let me start with a short answer – To the best of my knowledge, we do not yet have a law that governs web accessibility in India. The last I know of is that a working group has been set up, in Jan 2007, under the Department of Information Technology, Ministry of Communication and Information Technology. The stated objective of this committee is to formulate “Policy and Procedures for Implementation of Web Accessibility Standards”. This is the only public information available.

Web Accessibility and the Law - UK

Tue, 25 Nov 2008 23:49:00 +0530

Another country that has taken web accessibility and regulations thereof very seriously is UK. The primary regulation there, the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) dates back to 1995. The Part III of this act that is applicable to websites and requires them to be accessible came into effect on 1st October 1999. In the same year the Disability Rights Commission Act came into effect to set up the Disability Rights Commission (DRC), which was responsible for “elimination of discrimination against disabled persons” besides other tasks. This commission actively promoted the Part III of the DDA 1995.

'DMV' for enterprise social media?

Sun, 23 Nov 2008 22:26:43 +0530

Most modern enterprises are in the rush towards understanding & rolling out social media to help with their marketing efforts or to reduce support costs (among others). Most of this effort is in figuring out where to set up a blog, or communities. Companies pay little or no attention to who does the blogging and commenting - in fact they're grateful that someone volunteers!

Web Accessibility and the Law - Australia

Sun, 23 Nov 2008 21:39:00 +0530

Continuing from the previous post, if the changes in the US regulatory systems have been more visible as a consequence of the Target vs. NFB case, the laws in other parts of the world have actually been in existence for quite some time now.

Australia has particularly taken a lead in institutionalizing regulations / guidelines that make web accessibility a mandatory requirement. This blog lists some of these regulations.

Web Accessibility and the Law - US

Sat, 22 Nov 2008 22:38:32 +0530

A few days back Chandan Gokhale’s blog discussed web accessibility and the efforts of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) via its Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI). It briefly touched upon the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 1.0 and 2.0 (draft 11)). While the WCAG is an independent effort being driven by W3C, there are several legal / regulatory efforts being steered in countries around the world. This blog discusses some of these regulatory requirements for web accessibility in the US.

Economics of Web Accessibility - Part 2

Fri, 21 Nov 2008 11:05:35 +0530

The above statistics underline the fact that the size of the market for accessible technology is larger than commonly perceived. This is important because for disabled users, everyday actions can often be completed more quickly and efficiently on the web. Moreover of the 54 million Americans with a disability, 4 in 10 are online and these users tend to spend more time logged on and surfing the Internet than nondisabled users. The number of people with disabilities – and income to spend – is likely to increase as the likelihood of having a disability increases with age, and the overall population is aging. As the world’s population is living longer, there are more older adults using the Internet and physical impairments hamper web usage for users. Moreover over 20% of the EU will be over 65 years of age and the number of people aged 60 or over will double in the next 30 years. This will account for a large section of population which needs effective and efficient access to the Web.

Economics of Web Accessibility - Part 1

Thu, 20 Nov 2008 13:09:48 +0530

A large part of the World Wide Web is not accessible to a large section of the disabled population (about 18-20% of the global population suffers from some form or disability). About 97% of websites fail to meet the most basic requirements for accessibility. These are rather shocking numbers given the fact that the Web plays an important role and offers significant benefits for people with disabilities. The below statistics highlights the economics behind making the World Wide Web Accessible to the physically challenged population:

Understanding Web Accessibility

Mon, 17 Nov 2008 21:25:08 +0530

Starting this week, we will be addressing the area of Web Accessibility - organized in multiple blog entries – to address various facets of Web Accessibility. In this posting, we will look at the big picture, the meaning of Web Accessibility and its relevance for promoting Equal Opportunity.

Web 2.0 Heroes

Tue, 23 Sep 2008 23:12:53 +0530

Has anyone read Web 2.0 Heroes? Is it any good?

Thumbs down for 'Web 2.0: A Strategy Guide'

Tue, 23 Sep 2008 22:57:17 +0530

I just finished reading 'Web 2.0: A Strategy Guide' and frankly I was not impressed. It's touted as a guide for companies to figure out Web 2.0, but it failed to engage (at least me) and the language was a little contrived. I thought Groundswell was much better.

In its defence, it does have some interesting topics around Web 2.0 company valuation, but if you're already familiar with the usual case studies, I would give it a pass.

Crowdsourcing of Innovation

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 20:25:41 +0530

Let us examine the Transaction cost dimensions associated with the concept of Crowdsourcing. Transaction cost (Ronald Coase, 1937) and its applicability in the context of a firm comes into reckoning while discussing the issue of Crowdsourcing. Transaction cost for a firm, according to Ronald Coase refers to the “cost of providing for some good or service through the market rather than having it provided from within the firm”. Typical transaction costs incurred by firms include search costs, coordination costs, governance costs etc. This perspective enables a firm to make key decisions on which of the activities need to be kept within the firm (hierarchy) and which of the activities can be outsourced/procured externally (markets). The key advantages of IT enabled Crowdsourcing platform examples we listed in the earlier post is that they reduce search costs at the same time enabling very easy participation by customers by reducing the entry barriers for participation.

Crowdsourcing of Ideas

Wed, 30 Jul 2008 09:55:28 +0530

Crowdsourcing of ideas is finding increasing uptake in enterprises and is extending beyond enterprise boundaries. In the past Crowdsourcing of ideas were limited to the employees and in some cases the partners of enterprises. Increasingly we are seeing Crowdsourcing of ideas extending beyond enterprise boundaries to include end customers. Independent Crowdsourcing intermediaries such as CambrianHouse provide a platform for idea submission, evaluation etc. What is interesting is the adoption of Crowdsourcing principles by enterprises beyond enterprise boundaries involving end customers. Let us look at a few examples. Below is a list of three different companies operating in three different industries and have adopted the common theme of Crowdsourcing of ideas.
Starbucks:        http://mystarbucksidea.force.com/home/home.jsp
Dell:                 http://www.dellideastorm.com/
Sears:               http://www.sk-you.com/
This phenomenon raises interesting questions, which we will examine in the following posts.

Groundswell: A game plan for Enterprise 2.0?

Sun, 08 Jun 2008 13:53:55 +0530

Over the last couple of weeks I had two people urge me to go and read Groundswell. So I did. If you haven't already, I would recommend it.

In summary, it's probably the closest thing to a road map for implementing Enterprise 2.0 in companies (although to their credit, they don't call it that).

It's chock full of data (some of which will surprise you) and case studies. It also makes concrete recommendations how to evaluate what's the best strategy for a company (should we do a blog, an open forum or a video on You Tube). And best of all, the language the use (for the most part) is clear (focussed on business value not technology) and practical (always refreshing).

More Experiences from The Conference Board Meeting

Wed, 07 May 2008 14:49:25 +0530

By Ajay Kolhatkar

Here is an interesting experience shared by one of the attendees at the same conference. The person represented a respected foods and beverages company and also talked about the restriction on social media usage in their corporate office. He talked about how a senior product manager, who was required to comment on a blog about their product, had to rush to the nearest Starbucks outlet to access the social media website since it was inaccessible from within their corporate network.