- From: Edward O'Connor <hober0@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 15:25:56 -0700
- To: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Maciej wrote: > In this case, I believe a solution may be possible which can satisfy > everyone. Here is my proposal: First off, thank you for sketching a positive approach for resolving the issue without recourse to a vote. I hope everyone really seriously considers meeting in the middle on this one. > 1) HTML5 will continue to list and advise use of new techniques that > can be alternatives to summary="". Agreed. > 2) HTML5 will not make any flat direct statements that summary="" > shouldn't or can't be used. Instead, it will say that authors > SHOULD use one of the other techniques when possible and > appropriate[...] In other words, rather than focusing on what > authors shouldn't do, the spec will focus on what they should do > instead. I would much prefer it if summary="" were simply nonconforming, but in the interest of moving on to more important things, I can live with this. > 3) HTML5 will continue to include a mandatory warning for summary="". > The purpose is not to completely prevent authors from using > summary="", but rather to bring alternatives to their attention, as > described above. Agreed. > 4) The[...] spec will be changed to avoid disparaging summary in > unnecessary ways. For example, describing summary="" only in the > "obsolete features" section and not in the "table" section gives > the appearance of disparagement[...] My preference is for summary="" to only be mentioned insofar as it has UA conformance criteria, but I can live with this too. > 5) HTML WG will propose a WCAG2 Techniques update to the appropriate > working group of WAI (is it PFWG or WCAG WG?) to better reflect > HTML5 features for describing tables. I can draft a message to > communicate this, but I'd like to request: > > (a) John Foliot as a co-signer (assuming he agrees with the > language), since he said he'd support an effort to update > WCAG2, and I'd like to make clear that this is a coordination > effort, not an attempt to pick a fight. > > (b) I'd like to ask for some official blessing from the HTML WG for > this message, since WAI apparently takes official input from > Working Groups more seriously than input from individuals. Agreed. Thanks again for managing to sketch out a middle ground where we might actually find consensus on this. Ted
Received on Tuesday, 4 August 2009 22:26:56 UTC