W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > July to September 2001

Re: Proposal: checkpoint 3.4

From: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 20:09:30 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: Joe Clark <joeclark@contenu.nu>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org

It is not a veto.  The W3C works hard to gain consensus on issues.
Please, refer to our process document where it discusses Group Consensus 
and Votes: http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process-20010719/groups.html#WGVotes

Also, there are several others who agree with the basic premise that Anne 
has raised, myself included.  We just haven't found the appropriate 
compromise yet.  This is why we are trying to work through it.

It is frustrating when new people join the discussion who have not heard 
the arguments before, thus this it the third major round of discussions on 
this topic.  As frustrating as that can be, for a difficult topic sometimes 
that it what it takes.

If a group is unable to reach consensus, then we can cast a vote if we need 
to move forward.  Minority opinions are recorded as such.  I feel that we 
are getting closer consensus and thus would like to continue to do so.

My message was in no way a slight towards Anne.  It was my attempt to focus 
on looking for a compromise that she might find acceptable since I have not 
been successful in doing that yet.


>I was not aware that any individual party working on WCAG 2.0 had a veto. 
>That is essentially what you are saying. Anne's extremist views on 
>requiring illustrations and other "non-text" content for "text elements" 
>are very poorly supported. In fact, there might not be anyone else on the 
>planet who supports everything she does. Why are we rejigging all the 
>rules of consultation just to please Anne? She is no more important than 
>any other contributor to this process (and I do mean any).
>         Joe Clark | joeclark@joeclark.org
>         Accessibility articles, resources, and critiques:
>         <http://joeclark.org/access/>

wendy a chisholm
world wide web consortium
web accessibility initiative
seattle, wa usa
Received on Monday, 30 July 2001 19:59:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:38 UTC