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

Re: General Response to the Accessibility Task force%2

From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 13:42:46 -0500
Message-ID: <t2j643cc0271004221142j4cd297b9gffb1ee346427377c@mail.gmail.com>
To: janina@rednote.net
Cc: public-html@w3.org, public-html-a11y@w3.org
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 1:19 PM,  <janina@rednote.net> wrote:
>>    From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
>>
>>The Accessibility TF held a vote and did a blanket rejection of
>>several separate change proposals--all without discussion in the TF
>>group, and without splitting the items up so that each may be
>>considered by their own merit.
>
>
> As Co-Facilitator of the Task Force, I want to correct the record here.
>
> It is incorrect to say that we did not consider each individual change
> proposal.  While our resolution aggregates our response, we did indeed consider
> each item separately--on its merits.
>
> Furthermore, our recommendation message documents our deliberations on each
> individual proposal by URI reference to our WBS survey and to the minutes of the meeting where we
> discussed each proposal individually:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Apr/1086.html
> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/44061/200404_ftf-proposals/results#xq5
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Apr/0131.html
>
> For  convenience our deliberations are minuted at:
> http://www.w3.org/2010/04/07-html-a11y-minutes.html
>
> My apology if this was too obscure in the chain of URIs.
>
>

Janina, you didn't respond on each individual item.

We shouldn't have to look through meeting minutes and emails in order
to find responses in regards to each element. These were separate
change proposals. Because they happened at the same time should not
have impacted on how the group responded to these _individual_ change
proposals.

In particular, the group wasn't even interested in several of the
elements. From the discussion, the view on some seemed to be
indifferent, at best. That, to me, is not reflected in your
resolution.

At a minimum, you could have posted about each of these items as a
separate poll item, and then allowed your group to voice their
interests over each, individually.

Regardless, the only official response I see to this group on these
items is a single paragraph. That is the only item to which I can
respond.


> Janina Sajka,   Phone:  +1.443.300.2200

I also wish this discussion would happen in the HTML WG, because my
emails get blocked to the html-ally email group.

Shelley
Received on Thursday, 22 April 2010 18:43:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:08 GMT