Re: ARIA lexical processing related bugs require escalation

And for the record I don't believe that any of them need to be "escalated".

In the HTML WG "escalation" effectively means "I want the editor to stop
working on this bug". It means you are pretty much giving up. It means you
are implicitly claiming that is has reached a point of disagreement that is
otherwise unresolvable. That is, you're saying that you and the editor
disagree and there is no way that you are going to be get resolution
without the chairs stepping in to adjudicate a decision.

In my estimation none of these bugs have reached that point. They're not
even close. In particular, in the case of bug 11893 it's not even close to
being clear what Hixie is actually supposed to do in order to resolve that
bug. Hixie asked 9 months ago, "What's the spec I should use as the
reference for these rules?" and Rich responded, "We are drafting spec. text
at the HTML Accessibility Face to Face in San Diego" and posted a follow-up
comment 5 months ago that was helpful but in no way actionable by Hixie.

So to take that bug at this point and "escalate" it makes zero sense to me.
And pretty much the same for the rest of the bugs you listed also.

  --Mike

Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, 2012-01-13 10:13 +0000:

> I believe these bugs need to be escalated to issue(s) for last call as
> they are taken from the requirements in WAI-ARIA Lexical Processing
> http://www.w3.org/2011/01/aria-lexical-processing:
> 
> add role attribute to list of global attributes and add definition for it
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11891
> 
> explicitly state that ARIA states and properties are formal/normative
> HTML attributes
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11892
> 
> define lexical processing rules for ARIA attributes
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11893
> 

-- 
Michael[tm] Smith
http://people.w3.org/mike/+

Received on Friday, 13 January 2012 13:43:17 UTC