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

Re: [media] re the multitrack activity

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 17:19:11 -0500
Message-ID: <4D5AFBDF.6020400@intertwingly.net>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
CC: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
On 02/15/2011 04:57 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
> On Feb 15, 2011, at 1:44 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
>
>> I guess the problem is that there isn't really much of a
>> disagreement with the spec. The problem is rather that this is a
>> new feature and needs some serious work to analyse all the
>> implications. I don't feel comfortable putting forward a single one
>> of the options as a solution to the problem at this stage. I could
>> make a change proposal that could include multiple options and
>> their advantages and disadvantages, but having a dispute with
>> myself doesn't seem productive towards finding a solution.
>
> It's fine for one person to submit multiple Change Proposals. And
> that won't get in the way of deferring the bug to LC, if we have
> consensus to do that.
>
> The key issue here is making sure that we have agreement from the
> accessibility community to proceed to Last Call without this being
> addressed. There are only 6 days until the deadline, so I'm not sure
> we can get agreement on that so quickly.
>
> That's why I recommend still submitting a Change Proposal, while we
> review whether this issue can be deferred.

I agree with everything Maciej said, but would like to add:

Please do *NOT* submit a change proposal that could include multiple 
options.  If there are competing proposals, then please submit them as 
separate proposals.

Note: once one is submitted, we will issue a call for alternatives, so 
these proposals do not have to be submitted concurrently.

>> I guess what I am saying is that from an accessibility viewpoint
>> we absolutely need a solution to this problem in the spec, but the
>> given timeline is just not appropriate to propose an adequate
>> solution and the discussions have to continue across all the
>> stakeholders.
>
> That is understandable.
>
> Revards, Maciej

- Sam Ruby
Received on Tuesday, 15 February 2011 22:19:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:31 GMT