W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > April 2008

Re: [html4all] On HTML WG process - was [Re: Request for review of alt and alt value for authoring or publishing tools]

From: Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 13:52:49 +0100
Message-ID: <48074821.8010707@cfit.ie>
To: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Cc: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>, Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@ieee.org>, Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Steve Faulkner <sfaulkner@paciellogroup.com>

Hi Dan,
>>> As an individual, I do think that the HTML5 WG actually seeking advice
>>> from PFWG, as well as the WAI offering advice on a regular on-going
>>> basis would be most beneficial to process improvement.
> 
>> Perhaps you could be more specific about how that would be
>> different from what is currently happening?

[...]

> For one example, the editor could ask ahead of time for PFWG advice
> when needed. 

I think so to, also if the editor had more interaction with WAI, 
particularly when accessibility is not a primary area of expertise, and 
the outcome of decisions made by the editor will undoubtedly have a 
profound impact on that domain.

>Collaborate with the experts in advance. Listen to them.

My sense is that input is often not taken seriously. Even informed and 
well considered advice can be dismissed out of hand, I feel, which has 
been at times exasperating.

> Also refraining from intentionally inciting a flame war [1] would be
> helpful. 

Yes, this has not been a highlight. It polarises people and just 
decreases the signal to noise ratio.

Accessibility is an area that is often seen as one which holds progress 
back or is somehow a drag or burden. We must work progressively to 
change this perception and a less polarized WG would help this a great 
deal, comments like the one below do not help.

As a final thought, accessibility as a social function, is actually a 
little like entropy encoding, to use an analogy in that a lot of 
resources often need be used to facilitate the needs of a minority of 
users. This is a vital function in a healthy society.

Cheers

Josh


> [1] http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20080411#l-17
>> <Hixie> ok i must not bid you all farewell
>> <Hixie> for i am about to be roasted on a spit by the accessibility crowd
>> <Hixie> er, must now
>> * annevk looks at web-apps-tracker
>> Hixie> (i closed the alt text issue, issue-31)
> 
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 9:56 AM, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote:
>> Please let's keep process discussion off public-html...
>>
>>  On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 07:05 -0500, Laura Carlson wrote:
>>  [...]
>>
>>> As an individual, I do think that the HTML5 WG actually seeking advice
>>  > from PFWG, as well as the WAI offering advice on a regular on-going
>>  > basis would be most beneficial to process improvement.
>>
>>  Perhaps you could be more specific about how that would be
>>  different from what is currently happening?
>>
>>  The relevant people seem to be involved in the discussion;
>>  for example, Al Gilman's message of Tue, 15 Apr 2008 11:05:41 -0400
>>  makes it clear that he's following much of the discussion.
>>
>>  --
>>  Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
> 
Received on Thursday, 17 April 2008 12:53:40 GMT

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