Re: Revert Request

Hi Silvia,

The change directly implements half of Jonas' longdesc proposal.

Best Regards,
Laura

On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 7:25 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer
<silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Laura,
>
> I don't quite understand why that change is a problem. It expresses
> something that is already codified in ARIA and thus just brings it in
> line with another W3C spec. Also, it has no direct relationship to the
> longdesc issue, it just rectifies the use of aria-describedby with
> hidden text. longdesc has a very different purpose to
> aria-describedby.
>
> Therefore, I don't see how this circumvented a WG process.
>
> Regards,
> Silvia.
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 11:30 PM, Laura Carlson
> <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello Sam, Paul, and Maciej,
>>
>> As you know the editor made changes to the hidden section [1]. This
>> biases an open issue [2] as it directly implements a material change
>> from a change proposal [3]. The Chairs specifically asked for
>> justification for this change in their change proposal review [4]. If
>> the proposal lacks justification, then the spec lacks justification.
>>
>> I request that working group process not be bypassed and circumvented
>> and that the change be reverted until such time as the issue is fairly
>> heard and openly decided.
>>
>> Thank you for your consideration.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Laura
>>
>> [1] http://html5.org/r/6895
>> [2] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/30
>> [3] http://tinyurl.com/82rf7vq
>> [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Dec/0182.html
>>
>> --
>> Laura L. Carlson
>>



-- 
Laura L. Carlson

Received on Thursday, 26 January 2012 13:48:09 UTC