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

Re: last part of todays telecon

From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 08:38:20 -0800
Message-Id: <a05101001b82d650e11a5@[]>
To: <GV@TRACE.WISC.EDU>, "GLWAI Guidelines WG \(GL - WAI Guidelines WG\)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 5:37 PM -0600 11/29/01, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
>We began by reviewing the guidelines one at a time to determine whether
>or not:
>1.	they met the “80% or better” (80%+) objectivity criterion
>For number 1, "Provide a text equivalent for all non-text content”, we
>•	We believed it would pass the  “80%+” objective test
>For guideline number 2, "Provides synchronized media equivalence for
>time dependent presentations, we found:
>•	We believed items 1 and 2 would pass the 80%+ objectivity test

Now I'm getting even more more weirded out by this "objectivity"
we've embraced.  In my last email, I said:

      So 80% of people, who meet subjective criteria for inclusion,
      then make subjective determinations, and if they happen to agree,
      we label this "objective"?

Apparently the way we are using our newfound "objectivity" criteria
is as follows:

      A group of people -- who may or may not meet subjective criteria
      for inclusion -- "reach consensus" on whether or not they
      subjectively believe that at least 80% of an undefined group of
      people -- who meet subjective criteria for inclusion -- would
      make agreeing subjective determinations on arbitrary undefined
      specific applications, ... and we label this "objective?"

This is newspeak of the worst kind, folks.  If we want credibility
for our work, we don't suddenly label as "objective" things which are
clearly and absolutely subjective.  A subjective decision doesn't
suddenly become objective if you vote on it.

The specific process you've defined may or may not be useful and I'm
not suggesting we reject that out of hang -- but if you keep it, you
MUST rename it to something else OTHER than "objective."


Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>
Received on Friday, 30 November 2001 11:43:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:39 UTC