W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > September 2012

Re: ISSUE-30: longdesc "InstateLongdesc" - outlook

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2012 18:03:16 -0400
Message-ID: <50467AA4.8000606@intertwingly.net>
To: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
CC: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, W3C WAI Protocols & Formats <w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>, Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org>
On 08/30/2012 04:58 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> On Aug 21, 2012, at 1:57 PM, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, 2012-08-09 at 00:09 -0400, Judy Brewer wrote:
>>> Given the dependency on an unknown date (decision availability
>>> on Issue 204), and the overlap with scheduled vacations, we
>>> request a date of [Issue 204 decision availability] + 3 weeks,
>>> with the understanding that if we can have it ready earlier we
>>> will do so.
>> After doing some back and forth on this, including looking at the
>> impact on the timeline, I suggest that the Chairs start the survey
>> related to issue 30 on August 31st, and no later than that. If
>> changes have to be made to any of the change proposals, those must
>> be made before August 30th, 5PM EDT.
> At the request of the Director and the W3C Team, the Chairs are
> holding off on the ISSUE-30 survey until an unknown time, but no
> sooner than Wednesday next week.

The latest outlook has now been revised to be "no sooner than 11 Sept".

Current status on the expedited formal objection[1] is that it 
identifies a single paragraph to be removed.  Two proposed replacements 
have been identified:


We have some indication that WAI ARIA would be the right place to 
discuss proposed wording:


No time schedule was mentioned for providing said wording.

The same minutes suggested that "jurisdiction" was a key concern.  The 
formal objection itself makes a similar case.

As this may take some time to resolve, I would like to Robin Berjon to 
scope out what it would take to split out all ARIA integration from the 
HTML document into a separate spec that could proceed at a different 
pace from the rest of the document, and with the intent that said 
document could become a joint deliverable of the HTML WG and the PFWG.

It looks like there currently are approximately 150 occurrences.

$ grep "\baria\b" source | wc -l

Note: this request is just to scope out the effort, not to make the 
changes.  The request is to get this information together -- possibly 
incomplete -- by September 11, noon ET.

- Sam Ruby
Received on Tuesday, 4 September 2012 22:03:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:27 UTC