W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > October 2014

Re: clarification sought on publishing alt text document as a WG note

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 07:48:22 -0400
Message-ID: <543D0D86.1070607@intertwingly.net>
To: public-html-a11y@w3.org
On 10/08/2014 03:57 PM, Janina Sajka wrote:
> Hi, Steve:
>
> Steven Faulkner writes:
>> For future reference and in attempting to better understand how the process
>> works, can I please get an explanation of how a document[3] that it was
>> agreed by consensus at the start of June 2014 by the HTML WG [1] and the
>> HTML accessibility taskforce [2] was not published.
>
> I can understand your frustration. Completing this document as a W3C
> note seemed a pro forma task back in June to, I think, all of us. The
> approvals you note were indeed obtained. However, issues arose during
> the PF CfC, and things have devolved from there.

I can understand how that affects the final note, but I'm at a loss as 
to how that affects Steve's request for a heartbeat.

Normally the way things like these are handled is that the status 
section is updated with a warning and a link to the relevant bugs, and 
the heartbeat is published.

Two such bugs are linked in the previous heartbeat:

http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-html-alt-techniques-20121025/

Is there any reason why such couldn't be done in this case?

---

Steve's request for a heartbeat:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Oct/0025.html

What I have seen is:

+1 from Robin Berjon
Http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Oct/0026.html

+1 from David MacDonald
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Oct/0027.html

+1 from Shane McCarron
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Oct/0028.html

+1 from Gez Lemon
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Oct/0029.html

+1 from Billy Gregory
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Oct/0031.html

"seems worth doing" from David Singer
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Oct/0038.html

+1 from Grant Simpson
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Oct/0043.html

"supports the publication" from Léonie Watson
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2014Oct/0038.html

"prefer to see something with longdesc included, but don't think the 
continued wait serves any useful purpose." from you:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2014Oct/0039.html

"I support publishing a heartbeat of the linked document, as-is." from 
Edward O'Connor
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2014Oct/0043.html

-------------------------------------------

On the other side:
http://www.w3.org/2014/10/09-html-a11y-minutes.html#item04
"object strongly to publish this as is, due to issues around the 
longdesc sensitivity" from Liam
http://www.w3.org/2014/10/09-html-a11y-minutes.html#item04

"+1 to Liam" from John Foliot
http://www.w3.org/2014/10/09-html-a11y-minutes.html#item04

-------------------------------------------

Additionally, there were:

Procedural question by Janina:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Oct/0033.html

Other questions from John Foliot:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Oct/0037.html

- Sam Ruby
Received on Tuesday, 14 October 2014 11:48:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:56:44 UTC