W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 1997

Please slow down a bit

From: jaap van lelieveld <Jaap.van.Lelieveld@inter.NL.net>
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 22:12:58 +0100
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Cc: humanity@mailhost.atlas.co.uk, styler@rnib.org.uk
Message-ID: <apGF08h/nz1G092yn@inter.nl.net>
Dear Daniel and jody,

It is good to hear about the sudden developments.
I am glad though I joined both the Nice and Boston meetings.
In Boston I expressed my concerns on how user were expected to
join the five-working group construction.
The current developments make sure - to me at least - I was
right.
Therefore - as you can imagen - I am not happy.

First of all it might be good to explain a bit more clearly
what kind of man power is requested for each working group. Half a line
of description is a bit poor.

Second I would like to hear from you how you expect the user to
participate; how will future activities be organized.
Who is responsible for meetings etc. and who will pay the costs?

Third I have the feeling we did not use our time in Nice and
Boston correctly. Not that the work we did was not okay.
The work on the guidelines we did in Boston will prove to be
usefull. It becomes clear now though we did not do more urgent
things. I am glad Marray did, but it could have been much more
fruitfull if we did approach these kind of things in may instead of
september.
It is always good to do the urgent things first.

I do understand things must be done fast now, but how do you want
to organize it? One conference call a week? How and when with
all different time zones in mind?
By the way what is the agenda? What are we going for?
The recent meetings showed everybody as a different opinion about
accessibility.
Do we come to an agreement again without having any target
or terms of reference in mind?
Who is expected to support the outcome? How can be asked to explain
the outcome? Annonymous researchers or only Murray because 
he gives his opinion even if he is not asked to do so?

You can not be serious if you expect from me - and others - to explain
I did a good job joining WAI.

I argue a lot against the way how (our) volenteer organizations
sometimes do their jobs, but this approach beats everything.
I really feel sorry to say so, but this approach can never bring
the result we need. 

I as an EBU representative, representing the users of europe, must
say I can NOT agree on this approach.  I hope you will be
able to turn this work in a direction which is more acceptable
for all participants.
I would like to repeat myself and say: we still need access to
information (WWW) after WAI has ended.

Best regards,
Jaap

Message from: Jaap van Lelieveld      The Netherlands
              Chairman of EBU commission on Technical Devices and Services
E-mail:       Jaap.van.Lelieveld@inter.nl.net

USING: YARN V0.92 as an offline reader, and
       UQWK / OLMENU under UNIX for mail and news transfer
Received on Monday, 8 September 1997 16:38:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:38 GMT