Re: ISSUE-116: Would a separate document work?

hi maciej,

thanks for the info, will modify the issue as suggested

>You can control what sections an issue is attached to by editing the
special line that starts with HTML5-SPEC-SECTIONS. Feel free to adjust this
(within reason).
where can you do this?

regards
stevef
On 26 August 2010 07:53, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:

>
>  On Aug 25, 2010, at 11:41 PM, Steven Faulkner wrote:
>
> hi sam,
>
> a few  comments on the issue markers:
> 1. as requested in the change proposal the text 'last call for comments'
> should be removed as this statement is incorrect.
> 2. the text "IS <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/31>SUE-31<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/31> (missing-alt)
> blocks progress to Last Call" is only on 4.8.1.1
> *3. "Status: **Last call for comments." *is on each of the individual
> subsections
> 4. Both the current short (missing-alt) and long name  for  issue 31 does
> not reflect the scope of the issue.
> *
> *
> I would agree that the issue markers would satisfy Issue 116 for me,  if
> 1. the erroneous text 'last call for comments' is removed from the issue
> markers or replaced with text that is accurate, for example, "in dispute".
>
>
> Since the spec is not actually in Last Call (at least at the w3c), and
> since we plan to remove these markers before Last Call, it does seem like a
> good idea to remove these. I think James Graham maintains the script that
> adds these markers. James?
>
>  2.  "IS <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/31>SUE-31<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/31> (alt
> conformance requirements) blocks progress to Last Call" is included on
> each of the sections (4.8.1.1 to 4.8.1.1.14) that are in dispute.
>
>
> You can control what sections an issue is attached to by editing the
> special line that starts with HTML5-SPEC-SECTIONS. Feel free to adjust this
> (within reason).
>
>  3. the short name and long name of the issue are changed to something
> that reflects the scope of the issue, for example, short name "alt
> conformance requirements"
>
>
> I believe it's not possible to include a space in a shortname. Here is my
> suggestion for short and long names:
>
> ISSUE-31 alt-conformance "Author conformance requirements for the alt
> attribute on images"
>
> Seems like these would reflect the scope better.
>
> Regards,
> Maciej
>
>
>
>
> regards
> Stevef
>
> On 25 August 2010 23:01, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:
>
>> On 08/25/2010 05:15 PM, Steven Faulkner wrote:
>>
>>> HI Sam,
>>>
>>> Do any of the other documents you list contain normative content that
>>> conflicts with normative content in the HTML5 spec? Or are being
>>> developed as replacements for normative requirements in the HTML5 spec?
>>>
>>
>> Not to my knowledge.
>>
>>
>> What is within the HTML5 specification is seen by people to be the
>>> authoritative version of the HTML5 alt attribute authoring conformance
>>> requirements, it has the benefit of incumbency, being resident in the
>>> HTML5 specification. Either this does make it the authoritative
>>> version HTML5 alt attribute authoring conformance requirements or it
>>> does not, if it does not then the existence of the alternative should be
>>> indicated in the context of the alt section of the HTML5 spec.
>>>
>>
>> I'll remind you that we already have discussed at great length the idea of
>> prominent issue markers with "neutral" text.  We even got to the point where
>> a complete alternate draft was produced and was put up for a vote by the
>> working group.  The decision was to *not* include the prominent issue
>> markers.  One of the primary concerns was the selection criteria used to
>> decide which issues to mark, and another was over the lack of consensus over
>> the "neutral" content.  (And hence my use of "scare quotes" around the term
>> "neutral").
>>
>> An outcome of that process is that we actually did settle on a working
>> definition of a neutral issue marker: a simple and prominent box which
>> contains a link to the issue as well as the short description.
>>
>> In fact, there already is such an issue marker:
>>
>>  http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/embedded-content-1.html#alt
>>
>> Furthermore, the process is automated.  What caused that link to be placed
>> there is the existence of the text HTML5-SPEC-SECTIONS [alt] in the
>> description of issue 31.
>>
>>
>> So while the development of an "index of relevant documents" may be
>>> worthwhile it does not provide a satisfactory resolution to (for me at
>>> least) issue 116 [http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/116]
>>>
>>
>> I can certainly proceed with a call for proposals, but before I do, can I
>> ask you to explain to me why the current issue markers are not sufficient
>> for your needs, and why you think that asking this group again what seems
>> (to me, at least) to be essentially the same question that was decided
>> before has any hope of getting a different result?
>>
>> with regards
>>> Stevef
>>>
>>
>> - Sam Ruby
>>
>>  On 25 August 2010 20:56, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net
>>>  <mailto:rubys@intertwingly.net>> wrote:
>>>
>>>    On 08/11/2010 08:53 AM, Steven Faulkner wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>        we have 2 documents currently published by the working group
>>>        that have
>>>        normative requirements on use of the alt attribute in HTML5
>>>
>>>        Neither is authoritative or has the consensus of the working
>>> group.
>>>        Until the situation is resolved it is in the best interests of all
>>>        readers of either document to be made aware of the existence of
>>> the
>>>        other document to ensure that nobody is under the assumption that
>>>        neither document authoritatively defines the conformance
>>>        requirements
>>>        for use of alt in HTML5.
>>>
>>>
>>>    A few questions.  Short version:
>>>
>>>    Could this "index of relevant documents" be a separate document?
>>>
>>>    Longer version:
>>>
>>>    This is a probe to explore if there is a possibility of amicable
>>>    consensus, obviating the need for proposals, counter proposals,
>>>    surveys, etc.
>>>
>>>    Putting aside for the moment the fact that neither is required to
>>>    have consensus at this point, nor the fact that neither will advance
>>>    very far without consensus, the question concerning Issue 116 is
>>>    much more narrowly scoped.  It is talking about a simple link and
>>>    neutral information.
>>>
>>>    I'll note that this is not the only such document that the HTML WG
>>>    is producing.  The current list can be found down the right hand
>>>    side of the HTML WG page:
>>>
>>>    http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/
>>>    http://dev.w3.org/html5/rdfa/
>>>    http://dev.w3.org/html5/md/
>>>    http://dev.w3.org/html5/2dcontext/
>>>    http://dev.w3.org/html5/markup/
>>>    http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/diff/
>>>
>>> http://dev.w3.org/html5/html-xhtml-author-guide/html-xhtml-authoring-guide.html
>>>    http://dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/
>>>
>>>    I also note that the term "HTML 5" is often an umbrella term that
>>>    people use to encompass other things including WebApps, Device APIs
>>>    and Policies, CSS, ECMAScript-262, and potentially many other things.
>>>
>>>    So... the questions I would like to pose to the group is:
>>>
>>>    (1) Would there be benefit to the development and publishing of an
>>>    overview document for HTML5?
>>>
>>>    (2) Is there somebody (or perhaps a group of people) willing to
>>>    produce such a document?
>>>
>>>    (3) Would the existence of such a document satisfy everybody's
>>>    needs, i.e., if it were to exist and get past FPWD could we then
>>>    close ISSUE-166 by amicable resolution?
>>>
>>>    - Sam Ruby
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> with regards
>>>
>>> Steve Faulkner
>>> Technical Director - TPG Europe
>>> Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium
>>>
>>> www.paciellogroup.com <http://www.paciellogroup.com> | www.wat-c.org
>>> <http://www.wat-c.org>
>>>
>>> Web Accessibility Toolbar -
>>> http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> with regards
>
> Steve Faulkner
> Technical Director - TPG Europe
> Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium
>
> www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org
> Web Accessibility Toolbar -
> http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
>
>
>


-- 
with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG Europe
Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium

www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org
Web Accessibility Toolbar -
http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html