Re: Getting HTML5 to Recommendation in 2014

On Sep 20, 2012, at 5:04 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 12:40 AM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:
>> On 09/20/2012 07:35 AM, Steve Faulkner wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Paul,
>>> 
>>> I noted this;
>>> 
>>> "Move responsibility for the HTML5: Techniques for providing useful
>>> text alternatives document from the HTML WG to the A11y TF. "
>>> 
>>> This is the first I have heard of this. What is the reasoning behind
>>> the recommendation?
>> 
>> 
>> One clear error[1] has already been identified in the document, perhaps this
>> is a second one.  I'll share that the general thinking was along the lines
>> of "move things that should be jointly produced between PF WG and the HTML
>> WG to the joint task force".  But clearly as editor of that specification
>> your input would have considerable weight, so as such I would like to hear
>> what you would propose.
> 
> May I suggest that there is also an error on Issue-194?
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Sep/0266.html
> 
> I haven't received feedback on my questions yet, so not sure if that
> was misclassified or the decision process indeed changed for that
> issue.

It's not an error. The plan proposes that either or both of the transcript mechanisms identified could proceed as extension specs, either in the a11y tf or in the wg. If either meets consensus and satisfies CR exit criteria, then it could potentially be reintegrated. Note that there is still a proposal on the table to add no transcript mechanism at all for HTML5, so it's not just a question of picking between two ways to do it.

Regards,
Maciej

Received on Friday, 21 September 2012 00:15:40 UTC