# data[].attributes.headline
conforming to something is part of everyone's life, stating it as you could position this is part of good civic engagement and governance -> the reason why we want to conform to a policy

# data[].attributes.subject
conforming to something is part of everyone's life, stating it as you could position this is part of good civic engagement and governance -> the reason why we want to conform to a policy

# data[].attributes.headline
Suggest an liaison in each unit (like the FOIL for FIPPA). 

# data[].attributes.subject
Suggest an liaison in each unit (like the FOIL for FIPPA). 

# data[].attributes.body
Terms like "policy" and "conformance" and "responsibility" while all useful and necessary lean heavily on the 'stick' side of the equation. A balance of success stories, testimonials, before-after revamps, easy-wins and the whole education piece may be as necessary for actual uptake of policy, no?

# data[].attributes.body
I can see a bottle neck in having a single unit like EASI or AODA office responsible for reviews. We need a scalable option, with distributed responsibility.

# data[].attributes.body
I mean...everyone has to follow it...

# data[].attributes.body
It would be definitely helpful to have something to refer to when creating accessible interfaces and help standardize how we create our tools and systems

# data[].attributes.headline
feasible as it is inline with what the university already does/have -> policy documents

# data[].attributes.subject
feasible as it is inline with what the university already does/have -> policy documents

# data[].attributes.body
The EASI UX team uses a template whenever we're asked to look at the accessibility of an app/site, maybe that counts? It's basically just used to find issues and indicate which SC are broken so this may not apply here

# data[].attributes.headline
add another dimension/requirement/thing to your job/position

# data[].attributes.subject
add another dimension/requirement/thing to your job/position

# data[].attributes.body
In the past, web accessibility was the responsibility of divisions. Academic leaders did not always "own" this well.  Who will ultimately be responsible for compliance? Is this an "IT" thing, or non-IT divisional leaders responsibility to support and resource to met compliance targets?

# data[].attributes.body
I think this approach is feasible and would be welcomed by the community.

# data[].attributes.body
Template reporting models. Can be adopted by divisions to assure their compliance.

# data[].attributes.headline
provide a standard/something tangle to gage your work against

# data[].attributes.subject
provide a standard/something tangle to gage your work against

# data[].attributes.body
I think a formal policy would have to be kind of like job descriptions - say broadly what it has to do but not be too prescriptive about details.

# data[].attributes.body
I think it's a good start as something we can point to, and then go from there if more is needed.

# data[].attributes.body
It would give me something to point to when encouraging instructors to do the work to make their courses accessible

# data[].attributes.body
It is useful to say to a vendor, "look, here it is...we can't go against our policy" to push them

# data[].attributes.body
Would this be similar to IT security in terms of annual reports from divisions?

# data[].attributes.body
E.g. I would always look to the policy before I embarked on any digital project and follow it perfectly.

# data[].attributes.body
I really like this idea and it would help to standardize how we create content, especially for internal platforms. It would be easier to train people on accessibility.

# data[].attributes.body
From a UX Design perspective, a formal policy would help us vouch for adding dedicated development and testing time for accessible work within projects