Re: [w3c/charter-html] Charter must state a reason when duplicating work done elsewhere (#139)

@tantek wrote:

> To me this signals that all versions of HTML could/would benefit from a delta document from HTML that specifically adds/patches accessibility related items, a "W3C HTML Accessibility" spec as it were. The advantage of such a spec is that such accessibility enhancements would get properly highlighted rather buried in the W3C's copy of HTML 5.x which browser implementers in general don't bother reading. 

I think there is a misunderstanding. The HTML accessibility implementation aspects are largely developed at the W3C, the WHATWG defers to these. https://w3c.github.io/html-aam/ in browsers and http://w3c.github.io/html-aria/ for use of ARIA attributes in HTML. Implementers don't look to whatwg for these things at all.

The issue is around the HTML specification as a specification for the rest of us, those that are not browser implementers. A vastly larger and more diverse audience. Who come to the HTML spec looking for information on how to use HTML and to understand the semantics of HTML. This is what I personally have been working on at the W3C, as it is not a high priority for the browser centric focus of the WHATWG. I do not believe in this case a separate delta is the way to go, as it ghetto-ises accessibility information for developers that should be and is, in the w3c HTML spec, an integral part of the author advice and requirements, as it should be.

@michaelchampion wrote:

>  I definitely understand Steve’s concerns about “ the priorities and ideological orientations of the editors of the WHATWG spec are different to mine” and “ W3C… is still also the place where stakeholders with a commitment to accessibility, regardless of their affiliation with browser vendors, get a seat at the table”. But it’s worth noting WHATWG has become less “ideological” recently

The WHATWG is not organized to have non browser vendor stakeholders, it is very much a meritocracy of a subset of the browser vendors. Issues are decided by editors alone. So no, the publication of a code of conduct has not allayed my fears and realities of trying to work within the WHATWG structure. As real world interaction by myself and others on issues has continued to be problematic, and i can wander into a reddit thread where editors of HTML at whatwg, denigrate and besmirch mine and others work on w3c at HTML. I understand from a browser implementer centric view of HTML, the information contained in the HTML spec and the priority of providing good up to date author conformance advice and requirements is of less importance, but the vast majority of people that use the HTML spec are not browser implementers, and we need to provide for the many, not only the few.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/charter-html/issues/139#issuecomment-303077960