W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > October to December 2004

WCAG WG must clarify hierarchy of submissions

From: Joe Clark <joeclark@joeclark.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 16:37:10 +0000 (UTC)
To: WAI-GL <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.60.0410281615130.4407@aristotle.multipattern.com>

I petition the Working Group to *definitively clarify* which submissions 
regarding WCAG 2.0 are more important than others; which are automatically 
taken seriously and elicit comments or changes from the group; and which 
will, in practice, be ignored.

>From what I can tell:

* Anything anybody says at a face-to-face meeting is given priority in 
that meeting. If I'm the one who says it, however, it gets ignored once 
everybody goes home.

* Anything a Participant in Good Standing (PiGS), W3C Member, or W3C 
employee says is given highest priority everywhere, notwithstanding the 

* Submissions to WAI Bugzilla-- nearly incomprehensible, in violation of 
WCAG guidelines, and nearly unknown to anyone who does not read the IG or 
GL mailing lists-- have next priority.

* Submissions to the public-comments mailing list are allegedly read and 
considered. I view these submissions as next in priority.

* Submissions to the GL list (and some to the IG list) are routinely 
ignored if they are not authored by a Participant in Good Standing (PiGS), 
W3C Member, or W3C employee. Otherwise, they are next in priority.

* Any statement by any claimed activist for learning disability, dyslexia, 
or cognitive or mental impairment trumps all of the above and is 
immediately taken seriously and pushed to implementation.

I ask for clarification because it seems, as in John Slatin's review of 
issues in a certain guideline,


that Bugzilla entries have suddenly been given higher priority.

Further, as we get down to the wire here and face the day when WCAG WG 
must fish or cut bait, I believe there has been no resolution at all of my 
previous complaints about being routinely ignored while certain other 
contributors have their proposals immediately rushed through has been 


     Joe Clark | joeclark@joeclark.org
     Accessibility <http://joeclark.org/access/>
     Expect criticism if you top-post
Received on Thursday, 28 October 2004 16:37:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:59:33 UTC