Re: approving the draft for WCAG 2.1

>  It is a hard decision and people will be upset either way.

Agreed.
​It is also important to remember from a W3C policy perspective that this
isn't just *another* Draft, this one is our Candidate Recommendation​ and
is what the WG wants to publish later this summer, and so objections here
have more significance or weight. (That said, a few voices arguing for not
proceeding will likely not be accepted at this time without strong cause:
W3C process also calls for consensus not unanimity - it's not an up or down
vote.)

Additionally, at this time to raise a "Formal Objection
<https://www.w3.org/2017/Process-20170301/#FormalObjection>" to the W3C
process will require sound *technical*
*​* *​*
justification
​ or argument​ and cannot be based on perceived injustices or opinion
alone. Most of the members of the Working Group are committed to improving
the SC that benefit users with cognition issues, and so we too share the
disappointments. Many of COGA's SC came along a fair way before hitting
technical roadblocks, yet all of that work is preserved and we can take
it/them back up later this summer when we publish 2.1 (and start in on 2.2
almost immediately).

It's frustrating how long things take, but that's Standards work for you -
we need to be rock-solid all the time, and that takes time and patience.

JF

On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 9:57 AM, lisa.seeman <lisa.seeman@zoho.com> wrote:

> Hi
>
> Andrew has put out a survey for WCAG at https://www.w3.org/2002/09/
> wbs/35422/Updated_CR_pub/
>
> The first item approves the draft for WCAG 2.1 for candidate
> recommendation.  If you are satisfied with the draft you can vote yes. If
> you feel you can not live with this draft you can vote no (and you probably
> should  add the reason for your objection).
>
> If there are enough objections WCAG will be unable to publish and will
> have to address the problems  until people have removed there objections
> and are OK with the new draft. However WCAG really needs to keep to it's
> timelines and it will be a mess if there are to many objections.  It is a
> hard decision and people will be upset either way.
>
> All the best
>
> Lisa Seeman
>
> LinkedIn <http://il.linkedin.com/in/lisaseeman/>, Twitter
> <https://twitter.com/SeemanLisa>
>
>
>
>


-- 
John Foliot
Principal Accessibility Strategist
Deque Systems Inc.
john.foliot@deque.com

Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion