Outstanding Issues with CTAUR

Hi COGA + RQTF,

At the joint COGA-RQTF meeting last month, we discussed a number of outstanding issues with CTAUR<https://w3c.github.io/ctaur/>. Since that meeting, Lisa has identified a few more issues (mainly concerning Section 9 of CTAUR<https://w3c.github.io/ctaur/#conventions>) and these will be discussed at the next COGA meeting on Monday 8th.

There are, however, quite a few more outstanding issues that we didn't get round to discussing at the joint COGA-RQTF meeting. These relate to: things that RQTF consider too general or not specific enough to collaborative tools; things that require clarification or examples from COGA; and things relating to language, terminology and structure.

What would members like to do about these outstanding issues? My suggestion was to hold another joint COGA-RQTF meeting, but I'm not sensing much interest in that. Another option could be for COGA members to re-review the revised CTAUR <https://w3c.github.io/ctaur/> to determine whether their issues have been addressed (the document has changed considerably since the early draft on which COGA's feedback was based). Alternatively, we could just focus on the few remaining issues identified by Lisa (see her recent email to COGA), which would help to push things forward towards publication.

I'm open to pragmatic solutions, but I don't want anyone on COGA's side to feel that their feedback hasn't been heard.

Cheers,


David Swallow
Principal UX Consultant


TPG Interactive
https://www.tpgi.com<https://www.tpgi.com/>


A Vispero Company
https://www.vispero.com<https://www.vispero.com/>

--

This message is intended to be confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message from your system and notify us immediately. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or action taken or omitted to be taken by an unintended recipient in reliance on this message is prohibited and may be unlawful.