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

RE: Fresh start? Re: Minimal Browser Capabilities

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 03:37:55 -0500 (EST)
To: Harry Woodrow <harrry@email.com>
cc: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0112310311260.29945-100000@tux.w3.org>
Hi folks,

as a member of the WCAG group and someone who reads this list relatively
carefully (both in my own time, as it happens) I do try to ensure that
information goes between the two.

As far as I know there is nobody who has a formal responsibility to do this,
and in particular the only  accountability is trust and being
able to check. So if you have a point that you are not certain has been
clearly understood and accepted, and carried to another group, it is probably
valuable to check.

Further, I agree with Harry that what happens in the WCAG, a technical group,
is indeed something most accessible to people with technical expertise.

But I think Kynn is right that the WCAG group is relatively accessible to
"ordinary people" including ordinary people with disabilities - at least by
comparison to most W3C technical working groups.

cheers

Charles

On Fri, 28 Dec 2001, Harry Woodrow wrote:

  Thank you for your opinion that the WCAG is as open to people with
  disabilities as this group.  This may be so, and the W3c 's attempt to make
  it so is commendiblehowever there are except a couple of signifigent
  difernces.
   Non members of the WCAG can read archives but not directly post.
  Membership requires a commitment to attend meetings or phone conferences.
  Membership is not to be taken as a learning experience.
  True people with disabilitie are free to join ( subject to the chairs
  consent) if they can fullfill the requirements.


  Many people with disabilities and their organisations can not comply with
  those conditions partially because of the costs involved.  A full time web
  developer may be able to afford these, after all the costs are probably
  largely a tax deduction anyway but people who for various reasons often
  associated with their disabilities.  There are other reasons for not
  participating.  The group itself and the technical nature of the
  deliverables is such that the content is more relevent to technical experts.

  On the other hand this group is aimed at a more diverse audience who may not
  be able to comply with the WCAG membership requirements or who feel that
  they could not benifit the WCAG enough.  It would seem to me that the
  opinions of this group should be of value and by posting to this list it
  would be hoped that those members of the WCAG who also subscribe to this
  list could be a conduit to that group for the ideas of people such as those
  who may not have your unargued technical skills but know through everyday
  experience the effect that decisions such as those made by the WACG have on
  them.

  It is easy to stand back and say: "Well if there is no bread let them eat
  cake, but if the means to afford the cake are not there it doesnt help.


  Harry WOodrow
  -----Original Message-----
  From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org]On
  Behalf Of Kynn Bartlett
  Sent: Thursday, 27 December 2001 2:16 PM
  To: Harry Woodrow; Charles McCathieNevile
  Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
  Subject: RE: Fresh start? Re: Minimal Browser Capabilities


  At 12:16 PM +0800 12/27/01, Harry Woodrow wrote:
  >How many disabled users are there on the WCAG, I think you will find that
  >there are probably more people with disabilities and disability
  >organizations and developers with disabilities on this group than on the
  >WCAG.  If we are talking about making the web available for people with
  >disabilities isn't it important we give them a voice...and listen to them.

  WCAG working group has very low entry requirements; near as I can
  figure -- and I'm not speaking for the group now -- you have to
  state a willingness to participate and show rudimentary knowledge of
  the material, and you're welcome to join.  The archives are public and
  anyone who has a comment on developing drafts or working group
  discussions can speak up, even without commiting to join the group.

  So I definitely think the voice is there -- although I tend to think
  less in terms of "we" giving "them" a voice and more about "all of
  us", which may explain why I haven't done any head counts on who is
  or isn't disabled in the group.

  If anyone feels denied a voice in WCAG working group, please feel free
  to read up on the time and participation requirements, and consider
  joining the group if you feel qualified, or at the very least giving
  your feedback on open issues.  (This is not an official call for
  participation; this is Kynn pointing out that the means to be heard
  already exists.)

  --Kynn

  --
  Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>                 http://kynn.com
  Chief Technologist, Idyll Mountain            http://idyllmtn.com
  Web Accessibility Expert-for-hire          http://kynn.com/resume
  January Web Accessibility eCourse           http://kynn.com/+d201


-- 
Charles McCathieNevile    http://www.w3.org/People/Charles  phone: +61 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative     http://www.w3.org/WAI    fax: +1 617 258 5999
Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia
(or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France)
Received on Monday, 31 December 2001 03:38:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:59 GMT