W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > July 2009

Re: How to make complex data tables more accessible to screen-reader users

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2009 14:54:17 -0400
Message-ID: <4A524859.1000109@intertwingly.net>
To: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
CC: public-html@w3.org
Lachlan Hunt wrote:
> Sam Ruby wrote:
>> But I'm quite willing that put my opinions aside. If the consensus of
>> the working group is to have a vote on either a set of short essays or
>> on a comprehensive wiki page, then I'm willing to both facilitate the
>> vote and to attempt to evaluate consensus on the results.
> 
> My personal opinion on this issue is that I would rather not have a 
> purely technical issue be resolved through a working group vote.  If we 
> were to proceed with this vote to decide whether or not to include the 
> summary attribute, it would be the first time such a vote has been used 
> to resolve a purely technical issue in this working group, and, IMHO, 
> would set an unfortunate precedent, subverting the process that has been 
> used for all prior decisions based on logical and technical reasoning.
> 
> While I'm confident in the ability of this group as a whole to 
> collectively reach the right conclusion, if, as a result of the vote, 
> the summary attribute was included, it would be a clear symptom of a 
> design by committee process — a process I think we should try to avoid — 
> simply to appease some particularly vocal group members, despite the 
> almost total lack of any empirical evidence in support of their position.
> 
> I think the best way to proceed with this issue is for the chairs to 
> accept that all evidence submitted so far has been fairly analysed, and 
> that based on the available evidence, the correct decision has been 
> made. Then the issue should be closed, and remain closed until such time 
> as additional evidence, preferably in the form of scientifc studies, is 
> presented that overturns the result of all previous observational data 
> seen, and contradicts the current outcome.

I am charged with determining consensus.

I do not believe that a careful analysis of the data in this case
inevitably would lead to the result that there is only one single
"correct" decision.  Nor am I yet prepared to declare that the current
draft represents the consensus position of the Working Group.

- Sam Ruby
Received on Monday, 6 July 2009 18:54:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:47 UTC