W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2009

Re: closing issue-30 longdesc in favor of aria-describedby [was: Consolidated issues ...]

From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:55:52 -0500
Message-ID: <1c8dbcaa0908121155l61d81bcfn2129b97b5251c5ad@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Cc: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>, "W3C WAI Protocols & Formats" <w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>
Hi Sam,

> In all cases, the sentence that follows "The issue should not be closed"
> should to identify (a) what is the next action, (b) who is the owner of
> that action, and (c) when that action is targeted to be complete.

longdesc is currently a "raised" not  an "open", not  a "pending
review" not a "postponed" issue.

The definition of a raised [1] issue does not require an action.

RAISED = A working group member suggests this is worth a WG discussion
and potentially a decision, but to date no concrete proposal has been
created that enjoys a consensus of at least one.

The definition of closed [1] is:

CLOSED = The chairs believe either the WG has resolved the issue (via
spec editing) or the issue has been withdrawn. Only the chairs should
move issues to 'closed'. Typically moving issues from PENDINGREVIEW to
CLOSED will involve review in the weekly telecon.

Has the WG has resolved the issue (via spec editing) or  has the issue
has been withdrawn?

We reviewed and edited the Tracker definitions a year ago:

> For my part, I'm doing everything humanly possible to get Ian the answers
> he needs to continue to make progress.

Thank you. Much appreciated.

Best Regards,

[1] http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/#head-47c0b55d661dcf93f76d586ddbe292c9abc597e4

Laura L. Carlson
Received on Wednesday, 12 August 2009 18:56:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:49 UTC