- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 07:48:22 -0400
- To: public-html-a11y@w3.org
On 10/08/2014 03:57 PM, Janina Sajka wrote: > Hi, Steve: > > Steven Faulkner writes: >> For future reference and in attempting to better understand how the process >> works, can I please get an explanation of how a document[3] that it was >> agreed by consensus at the start of June 2014 by the HTML WG [1] and the >> HTML accessibility taskforce [2] was not published. > > I can understand your frustration. Completing this document as a W3C > note seemed a pro forma task back in June to, I think, all of us. The > approvals you note were indeed obtained. However, issues arose during > the PF CfC, and things have devolved from there. I can understand how that affects the final note, but I'm at a loss as to how that affects Steve's request for a heartbeat. Normally the way things like these are handled is that the status section is updated with a warning and a link to the relevant bugs, and the heartbeat is published. Two such bugs are linked in the previous heartbeat: http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-html-alt-techniques-20121025/ Is there any reason why such couldn't be done in this case? --- Steve's request for a heartbeat: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Oct/0025.html What I have seen is: +1 from Robin Berjon Http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Oct/0026.html +1 from David MacDonald http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Oct/0027.html +1 from Shane McCarron http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Oct/0028.html +1 from Gez Lemon http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Oct/0029.html +1 from Billy Gregory http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Oct/0031.html "seems worth doing" from David Singer http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Oct/0038.html +1 from Grant Simpson http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Oct/0043.html "supports the publication" from Léonie Watson http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2014Oct/0038.html "prefer to see something with longdesc included, but don't think the continued wait serves any useful purpose." from you: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2014Oct/0039.html "I support publishing a heartbeat of the linked document, as-is." from Edward O'Connor http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2014Oct/0043.html ------------------------------------------- On the other side: http://www.w3.org/2014/10/09-html-a11y-minutes.html#item04 "object strongly to publish this as is, due to issues around the longdesc sensitivity" from Liam http://www.w3.org/2014/10/09-html-a11y-minutes.html#item04 "+1 to Liam" from John Foliot http://www.w3.org/2014/10/09-html-a11y-minutes.html#item04 ------------------------------------------- Additionally, there were: Procedural question by Janina: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Oct/0033.html Other questions from John Foliot: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Oct/0037.html - Sam Ruby
Received on Tuesday, 14 October 2014 11:48:50 UTC