W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > August 2007

Re: Seeing the open issues

From: Steve Faulkner <sfaulkner@paciellogroup.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:30:32 +0100
Message-ID: <55687cf80708240630x7d449e4di723ce3f92d1577c3@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>
Hi Dan,

>Feel free to treat http://www.whatwg.org/issues/top just
>like any other random web page about HTML and ignore
>it, if you like.

In Ians original email he said that:

"You can even vote for an issue to indicate that it should be made a
priority (to do that, you'll have to have sent an e-mail that ended up
on that list, as I use that as a way to prevent random spammers from
trying to use this web app)."

So you saying "it can be ignored" means that it can be ignored if you don't
wish to have input (a vote) on what issues you think are should be dealt
with sooner rather than later.

there are two issues here that need to be dealt with:
1. There is a process set up outside of the HTML WG that affects the order
in which issues are dealt with.
2. That the client side application that  Ian has developed does not work
with a mainstream browser (IE) and therefore will cause issues for users of
assistive technology who do not possess the means (money to upgrade) or due
to technical limitations (software/hardware interoprability) are not allowed
to use the latest version of screen reading software such as JAWS (supports
Firefox in version 7.0+ - latest version is 8.0) or Window Eyes (supports
Firefox in 5.0+ , latest version 6.1)

Providing static and interactive content to the HTML WG in a form that can
be used by all current and future WG members should be a basic requirement.

Is setting some basic ground rules for editors of the specification, that
includes provision of accessible content, an unreasonable request?

If some simple design principles were adhered to there would be no need for
anybody to waste their time discussing such things.

On 21/08/07, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote:
>
> -cc public-html ; +cc www-archive, as this isn't a technical/design
> discussion...
>
> On Tue, 2007-08-21 at 18:10 +0100, Philip Taylor (Webmaster) wrote:
> > Personally speaking, I don't care whether Ian's "tool"
> > at http://www.whatwg.org/issues/top/ can be rendered
> > in IE7 or any other browser.  Any tool/discussion/forum/list
> > that this group is encouraged to use as a formal part
> > of its activities should be hosted by W3.Org and should
> > appear under their aegis, not that of the WHAT WG with
> > which very few of us are associated in any way.
>
> I'm happy that Ian gives us a peek at this information.
>
> True, official Working Group proceedings should be
> archived, if not hosted, by W3C... so I'm recruiting
> people to take the information Ian is giving us
> and share it via our official communications mechanism,
> public-html@w3.org .
>
> See discussion of changelog summaries and such in
> these two teleconference discussion items...
>
> Announcement mailing list, RSS feeds
> http://www.w3.org/2007/08/16-html-wg-minutes.html#item09
> Email traffic shaping, working style
> http://www.w3.org/2007/08/02-html-wg-minutes.html#item03
>
> Are you interested to help, Philip?
>
> Feel free to treat http://www.whatwg.org/issues/top just
> like any other random web page about HTML and ignore
> it, if you like.
>
>
> --
> Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
>
>
>


-- 
with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG Europe
Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium

www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org
Web Accessibility Toolbar -
http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
Received on Friday, 24 August 2007 13:30:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:18:08 GMT