W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-eo-plan@w3.org > July to September 2017

Re: policy plan

From: Eric Eggert <ee@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2017 11:23:26 +0200
To: "Bakken, Brent" <brent.bakken@pearson.com>
Cc: "Robert Jolly" <robert@knowbility.org>, public-eo-plan@w3.org, "Mary Jo Mueller" <maryjom@us.ibm.com>
Message-ID: <10686561-3B19-47FD-BB07-B6FA6B9CB675@w3.org>
All 15 issues from wai-policieslist are now moved to the wai-policies 
prototype repository. I’ve marked them with the question label for 
MaryJo’s or Robert’s attention. (Most seem to be addressed and/or 
from MaryJo.)

https://github.com/w3c/wai-policies-prototype/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Aquestion

Best, Eric

PS: This was a welcome change of pace :-D
PPS: I will likely make changes to the prototype to port it to the new 
layout this or early next week.

On 14 Sep 2017, at 11:08, Eric Eggert wrote:

> From the word doc:
>
>> Regarding the Repository(ies):
>
>> Currently there are two separate GitHub repositories for Policies. We 
>> need to get this down to one repository to eliminate any confusion. 
>> We would like you to reach out to Eric and work with him to solve 
>> this issue.
>>
>
>> The current repositories are:
>>
>
>> * https://github.com/w3c/wai-policies-prototype/issues (this is where 
>> current submissions go)
>
>> * https://github.com/w3c/wai-policieslist/issues (but this name makes 
>> more sense)
>>
>
>> Please work on the following tasks to clean this up:
>>
>
>> 1.	Find out from Eric which repository should be kept and which one 
>> should be removed/ closed.
>
> I think we should keep https://github.com/w3c/wai-policies-prototype 
> because it has more and more recent comments, IIRC.
>
> We can rename the repository to something more sensible, for example 
> w3c/wai-policies (all links that went to wai-policies-prototype would 
> not resolve anymore, however. There might be a way to set redirects.)
>
> (I wonder if the name is a big problem – the perspectives videos 
> repo is wai-showcase-examples, for example.)
>
>
>> 2.	There are issues in both repositories. Look through all issues in 
>> each and close any issues that are complete or no longer relevant to 
>> current or future work.
>>
>
>> 3.	Some issues were put off until after the AccessU push. Look 
>> through those and determine if any can be completed before relaunch. 
>> If they need to wait until after relaunch or 2018 then we need to 
>> confirm that list is OK with EOWG, as the expectation is that they 
>> would be picked up and worked on in near future.
>
> I think the issues need some coordinated actions from Robert and me 
> and maybe MaryJo. _Maybe_ I can have a look at what needs to be done 
> and do some/all of it while y’all are doing the user-testing.
>
>
>> 4.	Work with Eric to transfer issues (open and closed), if possible, 
>> to the repository that will be kept. If they cannot be transferred, 
>> then you may need to close some in one and open them in the other.
>
> I am just using https://github-issue-mover.appspot.com to move all 
> issues from the policieslist to the policies-prototype repository.
>
>
>> 5.	Once everything is completed, have Eric close the repository that 
>> we will not use. BE SURE THE ONE KEPT OPEN IS THE ONE THAT WILL 
>> RECEIVE SUBMISSIONS.
>
> I can do that :-)
>
> BRB
>
> Eric
>
>
>
> On 14 Sep 2017, at 0:26, Bakken, Brent wrote:
>
>> Hi Robert,
>>
>> Thank you so much for forwarding again. We figured out the issue with 
>> the
>> email, so I will see all future "planning" emails.
>>
>> The planning team met this morning to discuss and provide feedback. 
>> Sorry
>> for the delay of the response. *Attached is a Word doc* where we had 
>> made
>> some edits and added our recommendations to complete your plan. You 
>> will
>> find everything that we added or changed highlighted in yellow so you 
>> can
>> find it all quickly.
>>
>> With this feedback integrated into your plan, it is approved and you 
>> are
>> good to go. Please keep up the great work as you go through the edits 
>> and
>> work with your review team to get to a final draft. Remember, if you 
>> have
>> any questions at all, please reach out to me right away and I will 
>> get you
>> what you need to keep moving forward.
>>
>> Please let us know if you have any questions about what we have 
>> added.
>> Happy to provide more detail if needed.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Brent (& Planning Team)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Brent A. Bakken
>> Director, Accessibility Strategy & Education Services
>> Pearson
>>
>> 512 202 1087
>> brent.bakken@pearson.com
>>
>> Learn more at pearson.com
>>
>> [image: Pearson]
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Robert Jolly <robert@knowbility.org> 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Brent,
>>>
>>> I sent it, and asked about the status in my Survey submission this 
>>> week.
>>> Something weird must be happening!  Here it is again:
>>>
>>> (sent to public-eo-plan@w3.org on 8/24/2017 at 12:25 PM MDT)
>>>
>>> Hello EO Planning Team,
>>>
>>> I have been reviewing the Web Accessibility Laws and Policies 
>>> resource for
>>> its readiness for the new site design/re-launch, and the resource is 
>>> in
>>> very good shape, overall. As part of the review process, I have 
>>> created an initial
>>> Policies Workflow wiki page
>>> <https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Policies_Workflow> to document how 
>>> the
>>> resource will be maintained over time. Please review it and let me 
>>> know
>>> what changes you suggest to clarify or simplify the process and 
>>> ensure it
>>> is complete and accurate as possible.
>>>
>>> There are a couple of tasks that should be planned for pre-launch, 
>>> and
>>> they are listed below.
>>>
>>> 1. Review and make edits to the Policies Workflow
>>> <https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Policies_Workflow> wiki 
>>> documentation.
>>> 2. Review content within the Policies resource against the WAI Style 
>>> Guide
>>> <https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Style> and make any suggestions for
>>> corrections/updates in GitHub.
>>> This Style Guide review task is not expected to yield substantial 
>>> changes,
>>> as the resource was recently re-published with the whole group’s
>>> involvement in editing the content.
>>>
>>> Regarding the Workflow wiki page, I have been thinking about whether 
>>> or
>>> not we should mention it or link to it from the Policies pages where
>>> appropriate (like on the Submission page for changes/additions). I 
>>> would
>>> like to have feedback from the planning team on whether or not we 
>>> need to
>>> expose that level of detail directly, though.
>>>
>>> If all of this looks good to you, I will begin that work and 
>>> distribute to
>>> the Policies reviewers quickly to keep things on track.
>>>
>>> Thank you, and please let me know if you have any questions, 
>>> suggestions,
>>> or needs that I can help with.
>>>
>>> -Robert
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----
>>>
>>> Robert Jolly
>>> Sr. Web Accessibility Strategy Consultant
>>> knowbility.org | @knowbility <https://twitter.com/knowbility>
>>> *Equal access to technology for people with disabilities*
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 7, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Bakken, Brent <brent.bakken@pearson.com> 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Robert,
>>>
>>> Did you by chance send in the policy plan of action to the planning 
>>> team?
>>> I didn't see the email, or I completely misplaced it. I don't want 
>>> to delay
>>> your work.
>>>
>>> I know you created the workflow wiki and I have seen that. I just 
>>> can't
>>> find the plan for simple updates to the resource.
>>>
>>> Let me know if I am missing something.
>>> Brent
>>>
>>>
>>> Brent A. Bakken
>>> Director, Accessibility Strategy & Education Services
>>> Pearson
>>>
>>> 512 202 1087 <(512)%20202-1087>
>>> brent.bakken@pearson.com
>>>
>>> Learn more at pearson.com
>>>
>>> [image: Pearson]
>>>
>>>
Received on Thursday, 14 September 2017 09:23:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 14 September 2017 09:23:38 UTC