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

RE: Requesting Spec Text Additions

From: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 16:48:23 +0000
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
CC: "Michael(tm) Smith (mike@w3.org)" <mike@w3.org>, Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-ID: <E3EACD022300B94D88613639CF4E25F810CB7E11@TK5EX14MBXC132.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
>> Mindful that heartbeat releases of HTML 5 specification documentsare 
>> imminent, we request your guidance on how to proceed.

Personally I think this material should be added AFTER the current heart beat publications so as NOT to invalidate the publication resolution passed by the WG.

What do others think?


Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329

-----Original Message-----
From: Maciej Stachowiak [mailto:mjs@apple.com] 
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 12:21 PM
To: Sam Ruby
Cc: Paul Cotton; Michael(tm) Smith (mike@w3.org); Judy Brewer; HTML Accessibility Task Force
Subject: Re: Requesting Spec Text Additions

I agree with Sam's suggestion. Adding the text now seems like a good way to move forward. Sending this request to public-html seems like a good way to go. (Ian is also on the public-html-a11y list, so I suspect he is already aware of the request.)


On Sep 24, 2010, at 4:06 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:

> My two cents: it seems like the reinstating of these sections would increase rather than decrease consensus, and doing it now would improve our chances to getting to last call.  My suggestion is that this request is ready to go to public-html.
> - Sam Ruby
> On 09/24/2010 03:05 AM, Janina Sajka wrote:
>> Colleagues:
>> This request is being sent on behalf of the HTML-A11Y Task Force's Media
>> Subteam.
>> Some time ago we requested removal of certain media related sections
>> from W3C's HTML 5 specification documents because a specific technology
>> solution was being introduced, whereas it was the Subteam's strong
>> viewpoint that this was premature and counter-productive. We are now at
>> the point where we would like this text returned to our W3C documents,
>> however, still without any admixture of specific technology solutions.
>> The Subteam notes that two of these three sections were first drafted in
>> W3C space, but have been improved in key respects by the WHAT-WG. We
>> believe it would be fairly straight forward to return two of the three
>> sections we need without the technology specific language. The third
>> section we need will, in our view, require a bit more effort to
>> introduce in a technology neutral manner.
>> Mindful that heartbeat releases of HTML 5 specification documentsare
>> imminent, we request your guidance on how to proceed.
>> Shall we request the Editor make these modifications and introduce these
>> sections into W3C documents without the technology specific language?
>> Before or after the heartbeat publication? We'd prefer before so that we
>> can begin work on these right away. However, some short delay would not
>> slow us down drastically. We understand there are competing priorities
>> here.
>> Or, should we undertake first redrafting these sections to remove the
>> technology specific references ourselves?
>> The three sections we would like added to our W3C documents are:
>> ITEM 1. The<track>  element
>> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/video.html#the-t rack-element
>> ITEM 2. The Timed Text spec
>> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/video.html#timed -tracks
>> ITEM 3. The rendering rules
>> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/rendering.html#t imed-tracks-0
>> Further specificity regarding this request can be found at:
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Sep/051 8.html
>> Thank you for your guidance.
>> Janina
Received on Sunday, 26 September 2010 16:50:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:55:44 UTC