W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > August 2012

Re: CfC: Close ISSUE-206: meta-generator by Amicable Resolution

From: Michael[tm] Smith <mike@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 19:08:55 +0900
To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Edward O'Connor <eoconnor@apple.com>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20120802100854.GO54314@sideshowbarker>
Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, 2012-08-02 12:40 +0300:

> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 12:23 PM, Michael[tm] Smith <mike@w3.org> wrote:
> > My goal is to resolution on this issue without any formal objections. Not
> > 100% agreement on an ideal solution, but at least everybody agreeing on
> > something they can live with.
> I think the goal should be solving the problem in a way that actually
> solves it if there indeed is a problem.

Yeah, of course. But among the people involved in this discussion, we
clearly have some differences of opinion about what the best way is to
actually solve the problem, or even if there is a problem.

> Avoiding FOs is a distraction.
> If there a FOs, they should be noted and the group should move on.

I think avoiding FOs is not a distraction, and we should work very hard to
avoid them.

The reason I say that is, if we cannot resolve an issue on our own without
any FOs, the final decision about that issue ultimately gets taken out of
our hands, and instead becomes the responsibility of the Director. In the
worst case, that decision could end up being something very different than
what any of us right now want.

So I think it makes good sense for us to make every effort we can to try to
reach agreements among ourselves, in the group, on a resolution we can all
really live with.

I think there are some issues in the group for which we are never likely to
get agreement like that, and they are inevitably going to have FOs and end
up on the Director's desk. But this does not seem to me like one of those.

> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Aug/0037.html
> indicates to me that there is a problem to be solved here. (OTOH, if,
> instead of believing Steve, we believe the message from John that
> Steve replied to, there's no problem to be solved. I we believe that,
> we shouldn't compromise, IMO, but go back to the HTML4 situation.)

Its seems like maybe the prevailing majority of the people actively
involved in the discussion agree there is some problem here. Some people
may still disagree about the severity of the problem and believe that it's
not a big enough problem to justify the costs and possible side effects of
trying to solve it. But I think even those people might respect the fact
that the rest of us do believe it's enough of we problem that we're willing
to do a lot of work to attempt to solve it (including collecting and
evaluating data related to it over a one or two year "trial period").


Michael[tm] Smith http://people.w3.org/mike
Received on Thursday, 2 August 2012 10:09:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:29 UTC