- From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 12:51:02 -0500
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>, "W3C WAI Protocols & Formats" <w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>
Maciej wrote [1]: > Based on what Henri says[2], I instead suggest closing ISSUE-30, (longdesc) > unless someone objects. Dan wrote [3]: > Works for me. Has Chaals withdrawn the longdesc issue that he originally[4] raised [5]? Has aria-describedby been incorporated into HTML5 as WAI CG recommended [6]? That doesn't seem to be the case as Ian wrote [6]: <Hixie> well then aria won't make LC <Hixie> we can always do it after LC Shelley wrote [8]: > Until ARIA is, in fact, integrated, I would suggest leaving this item in. Leif wrote [9]: > Hence I suggest not closing ISSUE-30 at this moment. If aria-describedby has not been incorporated as WAI CG recommended, no functional replacement exists for longdesc, then I agree with Shelley and Leif. The issue should not be closed [5]. Best Regards, Laura [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/0577.html [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/0579.html [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/0600.html [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Feb/0065.html [5] Issue Definitions: http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/#head-edc2d90c3b34d500456e7e167ab59ce3a43c7ffc > RAISED = A working group member suggests this is worth a WG > discussion and potentially a decision, but to date no concrete > proposal has been created that enjoys a consensus of at least one. > > OPEN = At least one concrete proposal has been made resolving this > issue, but one on which consensus has either not been evaluated, or > has not yet been reached; a working group member is assigned an > ACTION to follow up (similar to ASSIGNED). > > PENDINGREVIEW = An Editor has reviewed arguments and edited spec to > taste, or the WG chairs have evaluated the level of consensus and > identified one or more proposals that would resolve the issue. In the > case where multiple proposals are identified, the Editors may make > the determination as to which one to incorporate. > > POSTPONED = The WG has decided the issue will not be addressed at > this time due to engineering constraints, cost-effectiveness, or the > inability of the issue to be address in the time defined by our > charter. To be investigated during the next chartering period. > > CLOSED = The chairs believe either the WG has resolved the issue (via > spec editing) or the issue has been withdrawn. Only the chairs should > move issues to 'closed'. Typically moving issues from PENDINGREVIEW > to CLOSED will involve review in the weekly telecon. [6] http://www.w3.org/2009/06/Text-Alternatives-in-HTML5 [7] http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20090811#l-285 [8] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/0586.html [9] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/0584.html -- Laura L. Carlson
Received on Wednesday, 12 August 2009 17:51:50 UTC