W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > April 2011

Re: minutes: HTML Accessibility Task Force Weekly Telecon 2011-04-14 [draft]

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 14:36:48 -0400
Message-ID: <4DA73EC0.7000505@intertwingly.net>
To: public-html-a11y@w3.org
On 04/14/2011 12:52 PM, Gregory J. Rosmaita wrote:
>
> Text Alternatives Subgroup Timeline and Scope Discussion
>
> JB: LauraC volunteered via email
>   ... timing issue with regard FO --
>   ... timing distinction -- FOs not normally taken up until CR stage,
> but an important exception -- any FO can be appealed to director, can
> be appeal for expedited review -- can be considered nearly
> immediately --
>   ... not convenient or welcome, but if need to address now, then need
> to address now
>   ... surprised at what i am hearing
>
> JS: not on table at time of @longdesc conversation

Just an observation, but the current status of ISSUE-30 longdesc is that 
this was already reopened, and that people are actively working on 
improving the Change Proposal.

As to ISSUE-32 table-summary and ISSUE-142 poster-alt, I encourage 
everybody to read the "Revisiting this Issue" sections in both decisions:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Apr/0091.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Mar/0690.html

It is my opinion that any request for an expedited review without 
providing this information would be unlikely to receive serious 
consideration by the Director, but I recognize that that is just my opinion.

On the other hand, I can speak authoritatively on this: providing the 
information that the chairs requested, if found to be complete, would 
result in the issue being reopened, and no FO would be necessary.

- Sam Ruby
Received on Thursday, 14 April 2011 18:37:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:19 UTC