W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2010

Re: Removal of other semantic elements

From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 14:58:37 -0600
Message-ID: <t2k643cc0271004021358q4d98c58fm889d000742745f66@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 1:24 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
>> On Apr 1, 2010, at 12:01 PM, Shelley Powers wrote:
>>> This discussion is become circular, evidently most people disagree
>>> with me. That's fine. I don't agree, but will take my arguments
>>> elsewhere.
>>> Most of my proposals were about removing these so-called "semantic
>>> elements". If the co-chairs want to close these proposals, since no
>>> one agrees with me, that's fine too.
>> The Chairs are very much interested in seeing the level of support or
>> opposition for this proposal, and the other similar proposals for removing
>> elements. That would be useful feedback for determining the next action.
>> So far, my read on this discussion is that a number of people disagree with
>> the proposal, some have expressed concerns without taking a firm stance, and
>> no one besides Shelley has voiced support. So far, I have not seen direct
>> comments on the other proposals.
>> We will be monitoring the ongoing discussion.
> To be clear, I feel the same way about the change proposals for
> ISSUE-90, ISSUE-91, ISSUE-93, ISSUE-95 and ISSUE-97 as I do for
> ISSUE-96. I.e. that removing semantic elements and attributes is bad
> for accessibility, even when ARIA can be used to add similar or
> equivalent semantic meaning.
> I'm definitely interested to hear what people with more accessibility
> related experience than me think about this.
> I believe Steven Faulkner said that he didn't want any other
> "controls" removed from the spec, which I would take to encompass at
> least ISSUE-97. But I'm interested to hear his and others feelings
> regarding the other change proposals too.
> / Jonas

I invite Steve and anyone else to respond, but I still want these
issues to go through the Decision Process.

It's tempting to say that no one agrees with my change proposals,
let's skip the formalities and just close these down.  However, I will
raise a formal objection if the disagreements to my change proposals
aren't put forth formally, so that I may have specifics as to the
objection, and also time to respond.

Received on Friday, 2 April 2010 20:59:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:00 UTC