On 02/12/2009 00:43, Andrew Harris wrote:
* obviously, a web strategy will include, at some point, a discussion
of web standards, so there's the tie-in!

At the risk of taking this even further off topic: maybe it's just a question of bad nomenclature, but "web strategies" are a broad term that needs refining a lot more. If - as it used to be the case when I was web editor for a uni - this strategy covers external-facing marketing website(s), it should really be an extension of the overall marketing strategy (and outline how the marketing objectives would be met via the website). If it also needs to cover internal sites or even broad provision of IT for teaching and learning provisions, there's obviously further strategies that it needs to hang off. But in both cases, I actually found that discussions about web standards, accessibility, etc are best served by having separate web publication guidelines, and have the strategy simply refer to them.

IMHO, anyway,

P
--
Patrick H. Lauke
______________________________________________________________
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]

www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
http://redux.deviantart.com | http://flickr.com/photos/redux/
______________________________________________________________
Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force
http://webstandards.org/
______________________________________________________________


*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
*******************************************************************

Reply via email to