- From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 06:48:22 -0600
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Steve Faulkner <sfaulkner@paciellogroup.com>, Cynthia Shelly <cyns@microsoft.com>
- Cc: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Hi Maciej, How can an issue be closed that has open actions bound to it? Since you closed ISSUE-35 aria-processing [1] that Cynthia originally raised, will new issue(s) be opened to track Steve's two open ARIA actions? They are ACTION-158 [2] and ACTION-138 [3]. Both of them are currently bound to ISSUE-35. Thanks. Best Regards, Laura http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/35?changelog http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/158?changelog http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/138?changelog On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 10:16 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote: > > On Dec 8, 2009, at 3:55 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > > ISSUE-35 was raised 10 months ago to propose adding detailed requirements > for ARIA to the HTML5 draft. Some time ago, ARIA was incorporated into > HTML5, including references to provide the processing and conformance > requirements. There has been some subsequent discussion, but no fundamental > objection to the work. On the other hand, some specific details of > HTML5+ARIA processing or conformance have been raised as bugs and/or issues. > > It seems that keeping ISSUE-35 open no longer has a great deal of value to > the group. It seems more productive to suggest changes to the spec's ARIA > processing individually, and to close this catchall issue to reflect the > fact that ARIA has in fact been incorporated. > > If there are no objections, this issue will be closed on December 17, 2009. > > If anyone objects to closing this issue and tracking further refinements > individually, then the chairs will promptly call for Change Proposals for > ISSUE-35. > > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/35 > > Per the CfC, this issue is closed without prejudice. Individual changes to > ARIA processing requirements can still be requested separately via the usual > process. > Regards, > Maciej -- Laura L. Carlson
Received on Monday, 4 January 2010 12:48:56 UTC