W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > July 2009

Re: PROPOSAL: Procedure to Promote Progress With Accessibility Issues in HTML5

From: Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 09:19:50 +0100
Message-ID: <55687cf80907220119p6fc65ff0x32f2f3c2ee90c265@mail.gmail.com>
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
Hi Manu,
would you  consider allowing me to edit your version of the spec instead of
creating another copy.
I would obviously consult with you on what sections i would be working on,
to ensure that no conflicts occur.

at the current time it I intend to redraft the:
4.8.2 The img element (
http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#the-img-element)
in reference to the WAI consensus document advice (
http://www.w3.org/2009/06/Text-Alternatives-in-HTML5)
my inital thoughts are to remove the section 4.8.2.1 Requirements for
providing text to act as an alternative for images from the spec and
reformulate as a W3C  best practice note, referencing it from 4.8.2 The img
element  along with relevant references from WCAG 2.0.

I am also intending to review the 4.9.2 The table element section
http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#the-table-element in relation to
summary.
I don't know at this point what if/anything will be changed.

regards
Steve

2009/7/20 Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>

> Sam Ruby wrote:
> >> 1. Is the call for more editors collaborating to produce documents
> >> genuine or is it a thinly veiled attempt at something else?
> >
> > If you can find a way to collaborate with Ian (or Manu or Maciej or
> > anybody else that has produced a document), that clearly is best.  If
> > not, producing a document that has a clear division of labor with one or
> > more existing documents is the next best alternative (Manu, for example,
> > has attempted to do both).
>
> Laura, John, Steve,
>
> I would be delighted to work with PFWG and WAI to directly author
> language into the HTML5 specification (as both an integrated section and
> stand-alone module -- as was done with RDFa[1][2]). The goal would be to
> produce a draft document that goes some way towards addressing your
> technical concerns.
>
> I do not see this as a long-term solution to a majority of the process
> concerns that each of you have raised, so please note this as an aside
> to the conversation currently going on.
>
> Just offering to help, if I may be of assistance.
>
> -- manu
>
> [1]http://dev.w3.org/html5/rdfa/rdfa-module.html
> [2]http://dev.w3.org/html5/rdfa/Overview.html#rdfa
>
> PS: My time to help draft language is limited, as this is not my day job.
>
> --
> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
> President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> blog: Bitmunk 3.1 Released - Browser-based P2P Commerce
> http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2009/06/29/browser-based-p2p-commerce/
>
>


-- 
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 Wednesday, 22 July 2009 08:20:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:18:25 GMT