W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > January 2013

Re: Requesting bugzilla component for HTML-A11y-TF

From: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2013 18:43:57 +0100
Cc: "public-html-a11y@w3.org" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, "Sam Ruby (rubys@intertwingly.net)" <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "Maciej Stachowiak (mjs@apple.com)" <mjs@apple.com>, "Mike Smith" <mike@w3.org>
To: "Judy Brewer" <jbrewer@w3.org>, "Paul Cotton" <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <op.wqaovkxty3oazb@chaals.local>
Hi Paul,

On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 18:16:33 +0100, Paul Cotton
<Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com> wrote:

> I do not understand how this new component will be used.

We're not trying to prdict the entire future, but we have some ideas...

> ALL the other Components under the "HTML WG" Product refer directly to a  
> particular specification at a particular W3C process step ie WD, LC, CR,  
> etc.

Right.

> This is the first Component that does not refer directly to a particular  
> specification.

Indeed. The most particular use case motivating the component is where we
identify an issue, but we're not really sure where in the plethora of
specifications it should be addressed - or we think it needs to be tracked
over more than one specification, and it seems that it does not always
make sense to track everything on the HTML spec itself.

In many cases (e.g. the longdesc spec) we don't currently see a need -
although people who want "something that does what longdesc does but not
longdesc" and don't have a concrete alternative, or think that the
functionality can be split over a multiplicity of other approaches, may
well want to raise such a bug.

> If bugs on a particular specification are re-opened and the Component is  
> changed to "HTML a11y Task Force" does that no lose the information that  
> was encoded in the original Component field?

If that should happen, then yes some information could be lost. Hopefully
such an act would be accompanied by recording the relevant data elsewhere
in the bug, rather than relying on someone going through the history to
reconstruct it. But I doubt that many such bugs will be shifted that way.
I think it is more for things which are not yet clear enough to be dealt
with in a given specification.

At least that is how I understand it. We'll see what happens to our
plans when they meet reality...

cheers

Chaals

> /paulc
>
> Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
> 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
> Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Judy Brewer [mailto:jbrewer@w3.org]
> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 11:41 AM
> To: Mike Smith
> Cc: public-html-a11y@w3.org
> Subject: Requesting bugzilla component for HTML-A11y-TF
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> Can you please create a bugzilla component for the HTML-A11y-TF, so that  
> people can assign re-opened bugs to the TF where appropriate?
>
> We currently have several Task Force sub-groups processing batches of  
> bugs that LĂ©onie has passed to us on behalf of the Bug Triage Sub-Team.  
> A HTML-A11y-TF bugzilla component would provide the most logical  
> classification for some of those bugs.
>
> Thanks,
>
> - Judy
>
> --
> Judy Brewer    +1.617.258.9741    http://www.w3.org/WAI
> Director, Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI), World Wide Web Consortium  
> (W3C) MIT/CSAIL Building 32-G526
> 32 Vassar Street
> Cambridge, MA,  02139,  USA
>
>
>


-- 
Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
         chaals@yandex-team.ru         Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Wednesday, 2 January 2013 17:44:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:32 UTC