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

Re: RESOLUTION: The TF opposes the change proposals to remove the elements

From: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 13:26:30 -0400
To: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Cc: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20100409172630.GB2298@sonata.rednote.net>
For the record, as this is a separate thread, ...

As has been pointed out elsewhere, things tagged as "resolutions" in the
HTML-A11Y TF Face to Face minutes are, in fact, candidate resolutions
for the TF to consider according to the TF consensus process.

We marked them as "resolutions" in our IRC logs and minutes in order to
take advantage of the tracking W3C IRC tools provide to text so labeled.
This marking is not to be confused with the meaning of "resolution" as
detailed in the TF Consensus Policy.

Janina

Laura Carlson writes:
> At the HTML Working Group meeting today [1], Cynthia pointed out a
> resolution that was made at this week's Accessibility Task Force the
> Face to Face Meeting. [2]
> 
> "RESOLUTION: The TF opposes the change proposals to remove the
> elements listed above. We maintain the work item to check them and
> make them good."
> 
> -1
> 
> At this point I am undecided about Shelley's Change Proposals to
> remove the set of interactive elements. Therefore, I cannot say I
> oppose them, because I don't know if I do or not. I cannot in clear
> conscience oppose them.
> 
> Counter proposals by individuals would help me to decide. That is
> happening outside of the task force in the HTMLWG [3] which is fine.
> 
> Some things to cover:
> 
> I have always used the three legged stool approach to web standards.
> Separate structure, presentation, AND behavior. Is this relevant
> anymore?
> 
> I don't know if interactive elements are needed. But if they are
> really needed, maybe a different set of them would help accessibility
> more. It is an odd set as Patrick pointed out [4]. The set should be
> looked at in a holistic manner.
> 
> Douglas Crockford talked about this recently [5]. He said,
> 
> "Speaking of HTML5… A big step in the wrong direction. In my view it's
> way too complicated, way too much crap in it. There's some good stuff
> in it, there's some very good stuff in it, some very bad stuff in it,
> and the HTML5 committee cannot tell the difference. I would like it to
> go away. I would like to start over. I think there are definitely
> things that we could do better in the browser platform based on what
> we've learned in Ajax. That stuff's not being factored into HTML5, and
> that's unfortunate."
> 
> "Because it turns out that Ajax developers are much better at this
> stuff than browser makers. You look at the quality of design in any
> Ajax library and it's infinitely better than what we've got coming out
> of the browsers, and it's infinitely better than what we've got coming
> out of HTML5. So I think this community should be the community for
> deciding what the next version of the platform should be."
> 
> "Ajax is great, and the DOM is not. HTML5 just gives us a lot more
> DOM. Ultimately I think we should seek to replace the DOM with an Ajax
> influenced API, because Ajax gets it right. What the particulars of
> that are, I don't know. It's really complicated, partly because
> there's so many ideas about how Ajax should work, but we're starting
> to see some convergence on some things. For example, everybody's doing
> CSS queries now. That was a really good idea, everybody's up on that.
> That should be standard equipment. But there's other stuff in Ajax
> which is similar to that that's not in HTML5."
> 
> Another question: Is ARIA a stop gap measure or not?
> 
> In one way it seems not to be, as WAI CG was hot to add
> @role="presentation" and  @aria-labelledby text alternative options
> for HTML5 in the June 2009, "Consensus Resolutions on Text
> alternatives in HTML 5" document [6]. It seems like they want it to be
> a permanent part of HTML moving forward.
> 
> On the other hand, the ARIA road map talks about ARIA as being a bridge [7].
> 
> Thanks. I have a lot of thinking to do about everything.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Laura
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2010/04/08-html-wg-minutes.html#item05
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2010/04/07-html-a11y-minutes.html
> [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Apr/thread.html#msg189
> [4] http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2010/html5-details-element-built-in-and-bolt-on-accessibility/#comment-666275
> [5] http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/theater/video.php?v=crockonjs-4
> [6] http://www.w3.org/2009/06/Text-Alternatives-in-HTML5
> [7] http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-roadmap/

-- 

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 Friday, 9 April 2010 17:27:03 GMT

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