W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2011

Re: w3.org site-wide markup review?

From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 09:04:19 -0600
To: Jonathan Chetwynd <j.chetwynd@btinternet.com>
Message-Id: <F1FD6AF3-6517-4BD6-BC27-BE2D304565F2@w3.org>
Cc: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org, site-comments@w3.org, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>

On 1 Feb 2011, at 9:01 AM, Jonathan Chetwynd wrote:

> Ian
>
> what is the hold on an independent external audit?
>
> an audit to assess whether and to what extent  W3C is meeting the  
> goals it sets?
>
> this was apparently under-discussion at the time.

Hi Jonathan,

Still no plans for an external audit. (I don't think that's what Danny  
was referring to; I understood Danny's comments to be about site QA.)

  _ Ian

>
> regards
>
> Jonathan
>
>>> ). But
>>> given the W3C's key role in producing the relevant specs and
>>> guidelines, there's a good case for saying its own pages should be
>>> subject to far higher standards of quality control than any other on
>>> the Web. Best practices, leading by example and all that.
>>>
>>> A good way for dealing with this would be for the W3C to instigate  
>>> an
>>> independent review,
>>
>> Hi Danny,
>>
>> I appreciate any offer of tools to help us maintain pages that  
>> people use, and where the tool ends up lowering our costs.
>>
>> This list is one way people raise awareness about page problems,  
>> and I read the list and fix the ones that we are maintaining and  
>> can be fixed.
>>
>> _ Ian
>>
>>
>
>

--
Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)    http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/
Tel:                                      +1 718 260 9447
Received on Tuesday, 1 February 2011 15:05:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:36 GMT