- From: Léonie Watson <tink@tink.uk>
- Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2016 09:56:04 +0100
- To: Rich Schwerdtfeger <richschwer@gmail.com>, Mike Cooper <cooper@w3.org>
- Cc: Accessible Platform Architectures Working Group <public-apa@w3.org>, ARIA <public-aria@w3.org>
It might make sense for the HTML AAM work to be done alongside the other AAM work within the ARIA WG. Of the three current editors only one (Steve) is a member of WP, whereas they are all members of the ARIA WG I believe. Léonie. -- @LeonieWatson tink.uk Carpe diem On 10/08/2016 21:20, Rich Schwerdtfeger wrote: > This is asking whether the entire HTML AAM effort should go to the ARIA > WG. I doubt we have resources to do that unless the same people continue > to work on it. > > Rich > > Rich Schwerdtfeger > > > > >> On Aug 10, 2016, at 3:12 PM, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org >> <mailto:cooper@w3.org>> wrote: >> >> The Web Platform group is working on a new charter: >> >> http://w3c.github.io/charter-html/group-charter.html >> >> I asked if was ok for APA and ARIA to review and Philippe said yes. >> >> I think APA should review from a view of deliverables and whether we >> need to / are able to work on accessibility review of them. But note >> that at a charter level there might not be anything specific to say >> unless there's a major flag. The important thing is that we can review >> the stuff in the ordinary course of business, which the charter >> already sets up provisions for. >> >> I think ARIA should look at the HTML Accessibility API Mappings, and >> in particular take a position on whether that should continue to be a >> joint deliverable between Web Platform and ARIA, or just become a sole >> deliverable of ARIA. It should also look at whether the necessary >> deliverables and coordinations are expressed to ensure ARIA works in >> HTML. There may be other deliverables that relate to ARIA work as well. >> >> Philippe asks that comments be filed via GitHub: >> >> https://github.com/w3c/charter-html/issues/ >> >> But it might be best if I aggregate any WG feedback rather than get a >> bunch of people filing issues. I'm not sure there will be feedback, >> but thought it was important that these groups have the opportunity to >> review. >> >> Michael >> >> >
Received on Thursday, 11 August 2016 08:56:43 UTC