- From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 18:25:27 -0500
- To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>, Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>, Steve Faulkner <sfaulkner@paciellogroup.com>, wai-liaison@w3.org
Hi Sam, Let's start out by stating the obvious: this proposal [1] is not about one particular feature. Therefore, to stay on topic and to avoid this thread being hi-jacked again, as the initial message sent proposing this procedure was, we will not address specifics of summary or canvas. The proposal stems from weaknesses with regards to accessibility in the design principles [2] [3] as well as inadequacies in the process of dealing with accessibility issues and utilizing the appropriate resources in the last two years. The proposed framework outlines a way of fulfilling the HTML WG Charter by offering a consistent way of approaching accessibility features with the support of the relevant expertise, namely PFWG. That being said, we would like to address a few points in your email. > From my perspective #3 is largely redundant with #2 and #4 That is a good catch. Thank you. Number three should be a sub-point of number two. We made that adjustment in the draft proposal [1]. > Approaches the subject with a goal of making HTML 5 the best solution for everybody, > including people with disabilities, and including people without disabilities. Our proposal is about accessibility per W3C/WAI's definition [4] (we can clarify that in the proposal if there is need). So in some cases, that means that the specification may need to contain some features that are *only* of use to people with disabilities, if functional equivalents are not provided. This was previously explained in the "Request to Strengthen the HTML5 Accessibility Design Principle" message. [2] HTML WG's job is to develop a standard for HTML5, not to redefine accessibility. Since HTML5 is to be a W3C recommendation, taking into account the W3C's work in this area is very relevant. > the proposal assumes that there is only one "right" solution, and that > the "right" solution is the one that we should be adopted. The procedure proposal does not assume that there is one right solution. It promotes working together to reach mutually agreeable solutions that PF can assure us are accessible. Best regards, Laura [1] http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/AccessibilityIssueProcedure [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Jun/0661.html [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Jul/0249.html [4] http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/accessibility.php
Received on Thursday, 30 July 2009 23:26:03 UTC