Re: ISSUE-142 (poster-alt): Chairs Solicit Proposals

Hi John,

The Change Proposal Template may be of some help. It is in the Wiki is at:
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposalTemplate

The Change Proposal Directory has quite a few examples:
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals

Best Regards,
Laura

On 12/16/10, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com> wrote:
>> Has this been noted (at this time) as one potential Change Proposal, or
>> should it be separated and re-written as a stand-alone reference?
>
> I encourage you to ensure that any change proposal meets the guidelines
> described at:
> http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html#change-proposal
>
> In particular the proposal you mentioned at:
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/142
> does not appear to contain a clearly identified Rationale.  I assume you
> would want the Issue: labeled text to be treated at the Rationale.
>
> In addition the Proposal: part  at the above link would appear to be a "a
> high-level prose description of the changes to be made" which requires
> "prior permission from the chairs".  Personally (without speaking for my
> co-chairs) I would prefer that you provide a more detailed change proposal
> that is "A set of edit instructions, specific enough that they can be
> applied without ambiguity."
>
> /paulc
>
> Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
> 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
> Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Foliot [mailto:jfoliot@stanford.edu]
> Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 6:36 PM
> To: Paul Cotton
> Cc: public-html@w3.org; 'HTML Accessibility Task Force'
> Subject: RE: ISSUE-142 (poster-alt): Chairs Solicit Proposals
>
> Paul Cotton wrote
>>
>> ISSUE-142 (poster-alt): No alternative text description for video key
>> frame (poster)
>>
>> Per the decision policy, at this time the Chairs would like to solicit
>> volunteers to write Change Proposals for
>> ISSUE-142:
>
> Paul,
>
> Embedded in that Issue tracker page is a proposal to rectify the problem.
> Has this been noted (at this time) as one potential Change Proposal, or
> should it be separated and re-written as a stand-alone reference?
>
> Thanks.
>
> JF
>
>
>


-- 
Laura L. Carlson

Received on Thursday, 16 December 2010 21:43:35 UTC