On 3 March 2015 at 12:44, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> wrote: > I have a few requests here. > > 1.) I would like to see some statement in the Status Section that > ties this stand alone document to the overall HTML spec, that explains > how this is the newly agreed modularization of what was formarly the > monolithic HTML 5.0 spec. To me this is a matter of contextualizing. > > 2.) Now that the ARIA portions of HTML are celled out into a > stand-alone module, I would suggest we should also make this document a > joint HTML & PF deliverable, via the TF. My primary interest is to a.) > make sure we get regular review in PF's ARIA subteam; and b.) assure the > public that we're coordinating. > I think request 1 is reasonable, but not something that should not hold up the CFC. I disagree with request 2, primarily because I believe it will add unnecessary procedural overhead to the production of the spec. It should be noted that ARIA in HTML does not define any implementation requirements other than on conformance checking tools and it is the purview of host languages (in this case HTML) to define the document conformance requirements as defined in the ARIA specification. For ARIA in HTML to be regularly reviewed by any working group (including the PF) it does not need to be a joint deliverable of a working group. I would urge any interested parties including the PF to review and file bugs on the spec as per HTML WG process. -- Regards SteveF HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>
Received on Tuesday, 3 March 2015 21:21:10 UTC