W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > March 2010

Re: resolution supporting navsubstree change proposal

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 21:57:34 +1100
Message-ID: <2c0e02831003160357w3880ab34k2aa71f93dc4cf376@mail.gmail.com>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: Michael Smith <mike@w3.org>, public-html-a11y@w3.org
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
> On Mar 16, 2010, at 1:16 AM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>> On Mar 15, 2010, at 9:32 PM, Michael(tm) Smith wrote:
>>> During last Thursday's a11y task-force telcon, we made the
>>> following resolution and agreed to announce it on this mailing
>>> list and to give an opportunity to any members of the task force
>>> who not on the telcon to express any disagreements they might have
>>> with the resolution.
>>> RESOLUTION: The a11y TF resolves that the canvas navsubtree
>>> proposal is ready for wider review by the HTML WG, with the
>>> understanding that the a11y TF supports it and that related
>>> proposals needed to fully resolve the issue are still under
>>> discussion and will be brought to the HTML WG later.
>>> If you have any comments on that resolution, please send them by
>>> e-mail to this list prior to the a11y task-force telcon this
>>> Thursday.
>> I'd still like an answer to my question about the earlier version of this
>> proposal (where it was called "adom"):
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Feb/0507.html
>> I asked this on Feb 23, and I never got a response, nor do I recall this
>> question being answered in the course of the discussions at that time.
> Looking back at the thread, I also don't see where Ian, Silvia or Tantek's
> concerns were addressed, but I guess they can speak for themselves.
> I also do not know where to find a link to the Change Proposal. The only
> link I can find is this, which is not a proper Change Proposal (among other
> things it lacks rationale):
> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Mar/att-0014/canvaselement-issue74-feedback1.html>.
> Is there a version available that includes rationale? Perhaps that would
> answer my question.

Since Maciej is digging it out again - of all the things that I asked
and didn't get an answer for, I would also say that the most important
is to have a proper change proposal. It is impossible to evaluate what
the changes mean and what implications they have without such a
proposal. Such a change proposal might even answer all the questions
that I still have. In fact, I don't think the TF should allow any
proposals to be handed on to the HTML WG without a proper written
change proposal.

Best Regards,
Received on Tuesday, 16 March 2010 10:58:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:55:33 UTC