RE: Re[2]: CfC: Approve draft charter for AC review

Jason,

I would heartly agree to this suggestion.

Thanks

Katie Haritos-Shea
703-371-5545

On Oct 12, 2016 10:04 PM, "White, Jason J" <jjwhite@ets.org> wrote:

>
>
>
>
> *From:* Andrew Kirkpatrick [mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 12, 2016 1:49 PM
>
> AWK: This was discussed on the call and we arrived at a compromise with
> David’s language.  Specifically, we indicate a longer expected duration,
> and we are also saying that this is approximate and that we will provide
> details in the AG project plan resource, which will need to be agreed on
> and created.
>
> *[Jason] So far as I am aware, no one has objected to the anticipated
> schedule for completing WCAG 2.1. If this is the case, then I think the
> best solution would be simply to omit statements about the projected
> schedule for delivery of specifications beyond 2.1, to affirm that we may
> wish to proceed either to a subsequent 2.x release or directly to Silver
> according to the situation at the end of the Charter period, and leave it
> at that for purposes of this Charter. The Project Plan can be revised
> flexibly as the schedule takes shape – also a proposal from which no one
> appears to dissent.*
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or
> confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom
> it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail
> in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or
> take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete
> it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.
>
> Thank you for your compliance.
> ------------------------------
>