W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2004

Re: WCAG 2.0, a joke or for real?

From: James Craig <wai-ig@cookiecrook.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 15:23:29 -0500
Message-ID: <4123BAC1.2050901@cookiecrook.com>
To: WAI-IG <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Cc: Joe Clark <joeclark@joeclark.org>, Jesper Tverskov <jesper.tverskov@mail.tele.dk>

Joe Clark wrote:

>> If you have something constructive to add, get involved and discuss
>> possible solutions with the group.
> 
> Actually, no, it is not the responsibility of the critic to solve the 
> problem. Pauline Kael was not expected to rewrite and redirect the films 
> she disliked.

That's hardly a fair comparison, Joe. An art or film critic will 
critique finished works they have no control over. WCAG 2 is 1) not a 
finished work, and 2) is open for public comment and suggested direction.

> If you want to have preferred participants (and you *do* have them), 
> then stop being surprised when everyone else tries to play by your rules 
> and gets *you* to do the work required to fix what you screwed up in the 
> first place.

Well, I don't think I've been involved in the group enough to have 
screwed something up, so I assume you're referring to the group in 
general (or the preferred members you mention) and I'll address your 
comment in that context.

When starting any document, someone has to make a first draft. The 
preferred members you speak of are really just the ones who spend the 
most amount of time on it. The Working Group process takes that first 
draft (submitted by the hardest-working members) and attempts to work 
out any problems before finalizing the recommendation. There are a 
number of ways to be involved in that process and Jesper (who obviously 
has good points to add) should participate to work out the problems he 
sees in the draft.

James Craig

-- 
http://cookiecrook.com/
Received on Wednesday, 18 August 2004 20:23:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 23:39:44 UTC