Proposals from initial bug triage

Marco, Martin, and I met to begin deciding which bugs we recommend the
Task Force take on. We started by reviewing the bugs in
and got about half way through. Thanks to Laura for being so organized
we had this easy resource to work with. Below are our recommendations to
the Task Force. These are just recommendations, though the point of
doing this in a sub-group is that it should be easy to accept them.

A couple notes - we were trying to find a minimal set of bugs for the TF
to focus on. Some bugs we thought had value but just didn't require the
entire TF. We think individuals can (and sometimes, hope they will) push
on bugs that we're not recommending the entire TF take up.

Bugs we recommend taking up in the task force

10252: add a11ytf, a11y_focus
10251: add a11ytf, a11y_focus
10249: add a11ytf, a11y_canvas
10248: add a11ytf, a11y_canvas
10077: add a11ytf, a11y_text-alt - need to determine how text
alternative approach works on <embed>
10066: add a11ytf, work currently going on
9623: Add a11ytf, related to the aria work

Bugs we think the task force does not need to take up

10026: not for TF
9657: not for TF, as long as fallback can be provided, we're not
persnickety about the form
10019: not for TF, this isn't specific to accessibility; it addresses
the criticism that people don't like hidden accessibility attributes,
but doesn't affect the accessibility itself; still good for UAs to
support, but not a spec requirement issue; and AUs should make visible
to editor
10017: add reference to text alternative proposal, but don't need to add
TF, and already defined that ARIA overrides native features
10016: same as 10017
10015: not an a11y issue, is a quality issue
9936: not high enough priority for TF, though Steve may continue to push
on it; there's a wider design issue involved, not useful to require
fine-grained warnings
9876: not accessibility, perhaps an AU issue
9893: not TF priority
9845: agree with issue but doesn't need whole TF, Steve should push
9804: not for TF, the issue is dealt with separately, and is mechanical
9589: not for TF, doing fine on its own

The following bug we weren't sure about and the question of whether it
should be a TF bug needs discussion within the TF:

9485: not sure whether TF should push or not, issue was discussed in
Birmingham, bring to group to determine action; we did want conformance
checkers to reference WCAG for alt; but Steve's alt document may be a
better resource now; do we want such a hard requirement?

Michael Cooper
Web Accessibility Specialist
World Wide Web Consortium, Web Accessibility Initiative
E-mail <>
Information Page <>

Received on Friday, 6 August 2010 21:30:10 UTC