Re: A PERMALINK TO MOST RECENT VERTIONS OF THE W3C

hi Chaals
 long time  since we last spoke.
 i shared the links that were sent to me with my team but i think i am
going to lose the battle for linking to the most up  to date page. i am
getting a lot of  resistance to saying 2.1 let a lone most recent. what i
wanted the policy to say was most  recent version  with one year to adopt
but its like pulling teeth to get any thing  over 2.0 in place.
 i may only be able to say 2.1 after doj makes there new rule making  final
but i thinkk even that is going to be a hard sell sigh lucy


Berkeley IT <https://technology.berkeley.edu/home>

Lucy Greco, Web Accessibility Evangelist

Campus IT Experience
Phone: (510) 289-6008 | Email: lgreco@berkeley.edu |

We champion diversity. We act with integrity. We deliver. We innovate.



On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 5:37 PM Chaals Nevile <charles.nevile@consensys.net>
wrote:

>
> Hi Lucy,
>
> Yeah, it is a battle to get policies that recognise things that can change.
>
> Maybe it will help in the battle if you explicitly set milestones for
> update - e.g. "When a draft of WCAG is published as a Candidate
> Recommendation, we will begin a policy refresh. At the later of N months,
> or when the Candidate Recommendation version is published as a
> Recommendation, the policy requirement will be to meet the new version".
>
> This means
>
> - you aren't left a decade behind the best practice we can get consensus
> on, and gives time to update when there is a new version.
> - the people who are meant to work on this don't have to change their
> systems and processes on one day with no warning.
> - your implementation experience can usefully produce feedback if you're
> doing a good job and starting to implement the update as a learning
> process.
>
> Candidate Recommendation is a good stage to be looking at how to implement
> the policy update.
>
> The point of choosing "the later of N months or publication of a
> Recommendation" means that there is a minimum time to adapt, but if the
> Recommendation isn't finished by then (e.g. because feedback led to
> further
> changes and a new Candidate Recommendation) you don't set the policy
> target
> as something that is still being changed.
>
> Cheers
>
> On Monday, February 5, 2024 22:48:10 (+01:00), Lucy Greco wrote:
>
>  > thanks Shawn
>  >  I am hoping our new policy can use this link but its an uphill battel
>  > people want a version number and then do not want to update policy less
>  > then  every 15 years so having this link will definitely my argument for
>  > linking and not stating a version number
> --
> Charles 'Chaals' Nevile
> Lead Standards Architect, ConsenSys Inc
>