W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-apa@w3.org > January 2016

Re: [css-flexbox] Transition Request, CSS Flexible Box Layout Level 1 to CR (updated)

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 13:00:53 -0800
To: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
Cc: w3c-css-wg <w3c-css-wg@w3.org>, Philippe Le H├ęgaret <plh@w3.org>, Ralph Swick <swick@w3.org>, W3C Comm Team <w3t-comm@w3.org>, "chairs@w3.org" <chairs@w3.org>, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>, Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>, Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>, W3C WAI Accessible Platform Architectures <public-apa@w3.org>
Message-ID: <569FF585.6020208@inkedblade.net>
On 01/20/2016 08:57 AM, Janina Sajka wrote:
> Dear Fantasai, Colleagues:
>
> As promissed in my email below, I am hereby forwarding the APA (formerly
> PF) concern with progressing the CSS Flexbox spec through to W3C TR.  We
> believe there is a path to resolution, and we would hope to work with
> CSS to achieve that resolution before the end of your CR on this
> specification.
>
> APA supports the concerns expressed by IBM in an email at:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-apa/2016Jan/0025.html
>
>
> I'm certain the concerns expressed in this email will be quite familiar.
> We discussed them together most recently during our joint meeting at
> TPAC 2015 in Sapporo:
>
> http://www.w3.org/2015/10/30-apa-minutes.html
>
> As the above minutes indicate, APA is reasonably satisfied that the
> approach prototyped by Mozilla will satisfy our concerns. You'll recall
> our Facebook participants mocked up a test for that during TPAC, and the
> results were very encouraging.
>
> What is missing is the next steps agreed in Sapporo--and frankly, also
> agreed during TPAC 2014 in Santa Cruz. We need the "best practices"
> documentation to be written, tested, and appropriately incorporated in
> W3C documents before this most useful and important, yet accessibility
> challenging CSS spec moves beyond CR.
>
> Please suggest how we can move forward on this. My reading of the above
> referenced minutes suggests CSS is understood to take the lead on this.

Hi Janina,
My recollection of the meeting in Sapporo on this issue was twofold:

   1. APA had more discussion to do on this topic, as there wasn't
      consensus in the room even among the APA folks. (You can see
      cyns and MCK expressing opposing points of view in the minutes.)

   2. The CSSWG indeed needs to draw up some "best practices" documentation,
      and took this as an action item. This was assigned to my to-do list;
      thank you for reminding me about it. =) I'll start working on this
      next week. (Since I've volunteered to present on this topic at the
      CSSWG meeting in Syndey two weeks from now, you should have at the
      very least a solid outline pretty soon.)

I will point out that this revision of Flexbox has more guidance on a11y
than the previous, and we hope this will improve the chances of good
tooling design.

Thanks~

~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 20 January 2016 21:01:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 20 January 2016 21:01:38 UTC