- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 08:06:36 -0700
- To: Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
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. Regards, Maciej
Received on Wednesday, 26 September 2012 15:07:20 UTC