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

Re: resolution supporting navsubstree change proposal

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 01:22:52 -0700
Cc: Michael Smith <mike@w3.org> (tm), public-html-a11y@w3.org
Message-id: <A3FA197F-50C9-43CD-B8D4-26D3AC8BA4F3@apple.com>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>

On Mar 16, 2010, at 1:16 AM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:

>
> On Mar 15, 2010, at 9:32 PM, Michael(tm) Smith wrote:
>
>> During last Thursday's a11y task-force telcon, we made the
>> following resolution and agreed to announce it on this mailing
>> list and to give an opportunity to any members of the task force
>> who not on the telcon to express any disagreements they might have
>> with the resolution.
>>
>> RESOLUTION: The a11y TF resolves that the canvas navsubtree
>> proposal is ready for wider review by the HTML WG, with the
>> understanding that the a11y TF supports it and that related
>> proposals needed to fully resolve the issue are still under
>> discussion and will be brought to the HTML WG later.
>>
>> If you have any comments on that resolution, please send them by
>> e-mail to this list prior to the a11y task-force telcon this
>> Thursday.
>
> I'd still like an answer to my question about the earlier version of  
> this proposal (where it was called "adom"):
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Feb/0507.html
>
> I asked this on Feb 23, and I never got a response, nor do I recall  
> this question being answered in the course of the discussions at  
> that time.

Looking back at the thread, I also don't see where Ian, Silvia or  
Tantek's concerns were addressed, but I guess they can speak for  
themselves.

I also do not know where to find a link to the Change Proposal. The  
only link I can find is this, which is not a proper Change Proposal  
(among other things it lacks rationale): <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Mar/att-0014/canvaselement-issue74-feedback1.html 
 >. Is there a version available that includes rationale? Perhaps that  
would answer my question.

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Tuesday, 16 March 2010 08:23:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:03 GMT