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

RE: Minutes: HTML-A11Y Task Force on 17 February at 16:00Z

From: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 18:56:34 +0000
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "public-html-a11y@w3.org" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
CC: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-ID: <E3EACD022300B94D88613639CF4E25F8186F414D@TK5EX14MBXC138.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
>  That statement cuts both ways: if it proves NOT to be the strongest case put forward, then it effectively will establish a significantly higher bar by which the chairs evaluate "new information" in any potential future requests to reopen this issue.

+1

The example I gave during the call was of an issue that was re-opened more than once (in the XML Query WG) because each time "NEW information"  was provided to the Chairs that the previous WG decision was not appropriate.  Eventually the WG found the right solution but it did require re-opening the issue more than once.  I gave this example to counter the perception on the call that the W3C process gave some sort of "single chance" to re-open an issue. 

/paulc

Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329


-----Original Message-----
From: public-html-a11y-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-a11y-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sam Ruby
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 1:41 PM
To: public-html-a11y@w3.org
Cc: HTML Accessibility Task Force
Subject: Re: Minutes: HTML-A11Y Task Force on 17 February at 16:00Z

On 02/17/2011 12:36 PM, Martin Kliehm wrote:
>
> <Zakim> oedipus, you wanted to ask about the "single" chance to change 
> the chairs' decision
>
> JF. We've been announcing this for a while, so it could have been on 
> the radar that there is a proposal in the making. It has been 
> explained in mails that even though the deadline has passed it could be reconsidered.
>
> <oedipus> paulc was the first on the bridge
>
> <oedipus> MikeSmith, you've been the one reminding us of a "single"
> chance to have chairs' decision reopened -- can you clarify?
>
> PC: In the W3C culture there's no "single chance." The process is if 
> new compelling evidence is put on the table issues can be re-opened or 
> amended anytime. This has happened many times in the past.
>
> MS: I agree with Paul. There's nothing in the process that limits a 
> proposal to one shot.

Can anybody cite where it was stated that there would only be a single chance?  In every case I can remember, what actually was stated was along the lines of "don't assume that there will be multiple chances".

My read is that the case that Laura has been pulling together is strong. 
  That statement cuts both ways: if it proves NOT to be the strongest case put forward, then it effectively will establish a significantly higher bar by which the chairs evaluate "new information" in any potential future requests to reopen this issue.

- Sam Ruby
Received on Thursday, 17 February 2011 18:57:08 GMT

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