W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > April 2010

Re: Moving forward with MultiTrack API [was: Agenda: HTML-A11Y 18 March HEADS UP! at 15:00Z]

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 15:58:49 +1000
Message-Id: <2F737F25-F3A5-49CF-9F7E-E2F1BEC4552A@gmail.com>
To: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
Cc: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
We had an approval on this particular part in the meeting three or  
four weeks ago from what I read in the minutes given changes made from  
feedback. The changes were applied more than two weeks ago. Since then  
we had the CfC and no more input.

I cannot attend a meeting at 3am and neither can other media subgroup  
people. If it requires my attendance to move it forward, it never will.

I believe a process that requires approval in a phone meeting that  
does not involve the relevant participants is a broken process. I  
believe a group like ours has to make its decisions on email or  
through votes that are accessible to all. Otherwise decisions are  
never made.

The only deadline we have this far is the one set by the Html WG - we  
require feedback deadlines here, too, such that change proposals don't  
starve within the group.

This particular proposal has had no further contribution in three  
weeks in contrast to the other one. There is harm in holding it back  
but no harm in extending the discussion forum. It's not like it goes  
straight into the standard just by putting it in front of the HTML wg  
for discussion in a wider audience.

Regards,
Silvia.


Sent from my iPhone

On 04/04/2010, at 11:36 AM, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> wrote:

> Silvia Pfeiffer writes:
>> On 04/04/2010, at 6:03 AM, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> wrote:
>>
>>> It's not yet approved in the TF. Media is on our F2F agenda.
>>
>> All discussion has been about Text Associations and will reasonably
>> be so at the F2F. We had a positive vote on this. We had a CfC on
>> this without rejections. How many levels of approval do we require
>> in the TF?
>>
>
> Step 1 -- Approval by the Subteam. I think you have that.
>
> Step 2 -- Approval on a TF telecon as described:
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/consensus-procedures.html
>
> This is the same we used with the canvas subteam.
>
> Janina
>
>> Regards,
>> Silvia.
>>
>>
>>> Janina
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In view of the 5th April deadline by the HTML WG on making
>>>>> progress on
>>>>> Issue 9 (http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/9), I will
>>>>> post this
>>>>> proposal to the HTML WG on Monday.
>>>>
>>>> That would be much appreciated.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Maciej
>>>
>>> -- 
>>>
>>> Janina Sajka,    Phone:    +1.443.300.2200
>>>      sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net
>>>
>>> Chair, Open Accessibility    janina@a11y.org
>>> Linux Foundation        http://a11y.org
>>>
>>> Chair, Protocols & Formats
>>> Web Accessibility Initiative    http://www.w3.org/wai/pf
>>> World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
>>>
>
> -- 
>
> Janina Sajka,    Phone:    +1.443.300.2200
>        sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net
>
> Chair, Open Accessibility    janina@a11y.org
> Linux Foundation        http://a11y.org
>
> Chair, Protocols & Formats
> Web Accessibility Initiative    http://www.w3.org/wai/pf
> World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
>
Received on Sunday, 4 April 2010 05:59:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:07 GMT