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

Re: [HTMLWG] CR Exit Criteria redux

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 08:06:36 -0700
Cc: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Message-id: <792A6E4D-7183-4208-88FC-CE70E982C53E@apple.com>
To: Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>

On Sep 26, 2012, at 7:37 AM, Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, September 25, 2012 8:32 AM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>> Do you think a third party should not be allowed to submit an implementation
>> report at all, even for final shipping versions?
> Yes, I think a third party should not be allowed to submit an implementation
> report. In the past, we've seen incomplete reports submitted by third parties,
> which can be hard to review and correct by the owner. I think an implementation
> report should be submitted by an implementer.

I see your point. But I think such a requirement would be unacceptable to members of the Accessibility Task Force, who will likely want to submit implementation claims based on combinations of totally separate software (a browser and a screenreader) and where it's unlikely the implementor of either piece would make a submission, let alone both. So I have not added it to the draft CR exit criteria.

I do hope the WG will be receptive to claims that a report is incorrect or incomplete, and that a more complete submission by a vendor or caveats about the readiness of a feature will be given some deference.

Received on Wednesday, 26 September 2012 15:07:20 UTC

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