Re: process for getting ARIA in HTML to 1st public working draft

On 03/03/2015 12:48 PM, Steve Faulkner wrote:
> Hi all,
> here is a FPWD version of ARIA in HTML
> http://rawgit.com/webspecs/html-aria/master/index.src.html?specStatus=FPWD;publishDate=2015-03-11;wg=HTML%20Working%20Group;wgURI=http://www.w3.org/html/wg/

looks like mailing list info is missing?

"please send them to @w3.org (subscribe, archives). All comments are 
welcome."

- Sam Ruby

> --
>
> Regards
>
> SteveF
> HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>
>
> On 3 March 2015 at 07:11, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com
> <mailto:faulkner.steve@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Thanks Sam,
>
>     will work with Robin.
>
>     --
>
>     Regards
>
>     SteveF
>     HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>
>
>     On 3 March 2015 at 05:20, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net
>     <mailto:rubys@intertwingly.net>> wrote:
>
>         On 03/02/2015 07:43 AM, Steve Faulkner wrote:
>
>             Hi all,
>             The ARIA in HTML spec is getting close to the point (i
>             think) where it
>             will be ready for publication as a WD
>             https://specs.webplatform.org/__html-aria/webspecs/master/
>             <https://specs.webplatform.org/html-aria/webspecs/master/>
>
>             What is the process for making this happen?
>
>             Note the html 5.1 nightly WAI-ARIA section has been updated
>             to point to
>             ARIA in HTML along with the Acc API spec
>             http://www.w3.org/html/wg/__drafts/html/master/#wai-aria
>             <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/#wai-aria>
>
>
>         After checking with the domain lead (PLH) and others, a new CfC
>         for a FPWD is required.  That being said: the presence of bugs
>         (e.g. in the links from and to the HTML spec) are not a
>         concern.  And this document can start out with the 2014 process,
>         so a single CfC should suffice. And finally, the fact that much
>         of this content has previously been published should make this
>         easier.  This means that the WG review will most likely focus on
>         things like the status section.
>
>         Such a section is not present in the webplatform document you
>         linked above.
>
>         Netting this all out: if you can work with Robin to prepare a
>         version of this document that would be suitable for publishing
>         by Echidna[1], I can start a CfC which will run for 7 days.
>         Once that is successfully complete, you should be able to update
>         the document at will.
>
>             --
>
>             Regards
>
>             SteveF
>             HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/__drafts/html/master/
>             <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>>
>
>
>         https://github.com/w3c/__echidna/wiki/How-to-use-__Echidna
>         <https://github.com/w3c/echidna/wiki/How-to-use-Echidna>
>
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 3 March 2015 17:55:06 UTC