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

Re: Requesting Spec Text Additions

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 07:06:34 -0400
Message-ID: <4C9C863A.3000104@intertwingly.net>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, "Michael(tm) Smith (mike@w3.org)" <mike@w3.org>, Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
My two cents: it seems like the reinstating of these sections would 
increase rather than decrease consensus, and doing it now would improve 
our chances to getting to last call.  My suggestion is that this request 
is ready to go to public-html.

- Sam Ruby

On 09/24/2010 03:05 AM, Janina Sajka wrote:
> Colleagues:
> This request is being sent on behalf of the HTML-A11Y Task Force's Media
> Subteam.
> Some time ago we requested removal of certain media related sections
> from W3C's HTML 5 specification documents because a specific technology
> solution was being introduced, whereas it was the Subteam's strong
> viewpoint that this was premature and counter-productive. We are now at
> the point where we would like this text returned to our W3C documents,
> however, still without any admixture of specific technology solutions.
> The Subteam notes that two of these three sections were first drafted in
> W3C space, but have been improved in key respects by the WHAT-WG. We
> believe it would be fairly straight forward to return two of the three
> sections we need without the technology specific language. The third
> section we need will, in our view, require a bit more effort to
> introduce in a technology neutral manner.
> Mindful that heartbeat releases of HTML 5 specification documentsare
> imminent, we request your guidance on how to proceed.
> Shall we request the Editor make these modifications and introduce these
> sections into W3C documents without the technology specific language?
> Before or after the heartbeat publication? We'd prefer before so that we
> can begin work on these right away. However, some short delay would not
> slow us down drastically. We understand there are competing priorities
> here.
> Or, should we undertake first redrafting these sections to remove the
> technology specific references ourselves?
> The three sections we would like added to our W3C documents are:
> ITEM 1. The<track>  element
> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/video.html#the-t rack-element
> ITEM 2. The Timed Text spec
> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/video.html#timed -tracks
> ITEM 3. The rendering rules
> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/rendering.html#t imed-tracks-0
> Further specificity regarding this request can be found at:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Sep/051 8.html
> Thank you for your guidance.
> Janina
Received on Friday, 24 September 2010 11:37:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:55:44 UTC