Re: Accessibility Task Force

Sam Ruby writes:
> It is the intent of the chairs of the HTML WG to seek and obtain signoff  
> from PFWG prior to Last Call -- independent of the existence (or  
> non-existence) of this task force.
> The longer this task force remains "in limbo" the harder our jobs will be.
> My understanding is that the plan that PLH put forward can be put in  
> place nearly immediately.

I appreciate this statement and certainly accept its sincerity. But,
before PF responds, I'd like to understand the problem better.

Are we saying that existing W3C intellectual property policies and
practices prevent members of two working groups from coming together in
email and on the telephone to work on issues of mutual concern? If so,
how is it we're able to come together for such purposes when we meet in
person? At our Technical Plenaries, for instance?

I recall members of HTML joining a PF meeting during the Mandelieu
plenary last October to resolve issues relating to table headers. Later
that week, members of PF joined the HTML meeting.

Are we now saying we can't send our members into a room to work on
issues together? Are we not individually subscribed to the same W3C IP
commitments by way of qualification for WG membership?

I am no attorney, nor do I seek to play one in email. But I would
bluntly ask whether we're relying on expert legal counsel, or our own
lay understanding here?


> - Sam Ruby


Janina Sajka,	Phone:	+1.202.595.7777;
Partner, Capital Accessibility LLC	http://CapitalAccessibility.Com

Marketing the Owasys 22C talking screenless cell phone in the U.S. and Canada
Learn more at http://ScreenlessPhone.Com

Chair, Open Accessibility	
Linux Foundation

Chair, Protocols & Formats
Web Accessibility Initiative
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)

Received on Friday, 11 September 2009 04:34:26 UTC