- From: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
- Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2022 10:02:41 -0400
- To: John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
- Cc: Charles LaPierre <charlesl@benetech.org>, Lionel Wolberger <lionel@userway.org>, public-personalization-tf <public-personalization-tf@w3.org>, Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
The naming of major W3C/WAI specifications has always been a WAI wide matter. The term "ARIA" was actually also crafted by EO. John, I think you've got too narrow a view of who's internal vs. external to our consensus process. Best, Janina John Foliot writes: > Hi Charles, > > Yes, I did say I could live with it, but I truly am disappointed, for the > reasons I have laid out. I guess I am also disappointed that so many > external commenters had such an influence here, but, c'est la guerre. > > I am moving on, and agree that forward movement is best. > > JF > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 8:29 PM Charles LaPierre <charlesl@benetech.org> > wrote: > > > I am surprised by your reaction John, because just last week in a call for > > consensus you replied and stated on record: > > > > FWIW, I can live with WAI-ADAPT, could live better with WAI-Adapt (case > > sensitivity), and strongly oppose WAI-APT (what's a WAI Apartment > > <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/apt#:~:text=an%20apt%20pupil-,apt,2%20aptitude> > > ?) > > > > > > So they actually went with the “could live better with” option you said. > > I realize it's not perfect and we could bike shed this for the next year, > > lets move on as we have bigger fish to catch ;) > > > > Thanks > > Charles > > EOM > > > > Charles LaPierre > > Principal, Accessibility Standards, and Technical Lead, Global Certified > > Accessible > > Benetech > > Twitter: @CLaPierreA11Y > > > > > > > > On Apr 6, 2022, at 1:59 PM, John Foliot <john@foliot.ca> wrote: > > > > This is truly sad to hear Lionel, especially given there were some real > > and valid reasons why both Lisa (one of the original co-chairs) and I were > > unhappy with that particular name choice. I fear it is far too focused on > > the ACC symbols piece, which is but 1/6th of our initial module - even > > though that one proposed attribute has taken a lion's share of our time > > since i18n got involved (who also did not understand our intentions). > > > > I am also quite disappointed that a decision is being dictated to the > > group that worked on this specification by outside commentators (so much > > for seeking consensus at the W3C). I thought that Groups *should favor > > proposals that create the weakest objections, which is preferred over > > proposals that are supported by a large majority but that cause strong > > objections from a few people*. FWIW, I strongly object to this name > > choice, and regret that I was not as forceful in expressing the strength of > > that objection earlier. > > > > ********************* > > I again reiterate that there is NOTHING specifically related to adaptation > > (def.: the act or process of changing to better suit a situation) with > > the proposed attributes of: > > > > - Action > > <https://www.w3.org/TR/personalization-semantics-content-1.0/#action-explanation>: > > The action attribute provides the context of a button. It is typically used > > on a button element or element with role="button". > > - Destination > > <https://www.w3.org/TR/personalization-semantics-content-1.0/#destination-explanation>: The > > destination attribute categorizes the target of a hyperlink. > > - Purpose > > <https://www.w3.org/TR/personalization-semantics-content-1.0/#purpose-explanation>: > > The purpose attribute provides the context of a text input field such as a > > text box. It is typically used on an input of type text, or an element with > > a corresponding role. > > > > Two of the above three specifically note that the attribute adds > > additional contextual information to the parent element. It is true that we > > envision that *user-agents* will be able to use our embedded metadata to > > customized a specific user's experience based on that contextual > > information (which may or may-not involve changing or modifying the user > > interface to meet specific user needs), but we are creating an authoring > > spec, and not a tool/mechanism/API/process that *does *the adaptation, > > which I argue the current name choice seems to allude to. It also presumes > > that the ONLY reason to add these attributes and values is for adaptation > > purposes, completely ignoring the fact that embedded metadata can be far > > more useful than just that. > > > > For example, the attribute that was a bit of a template for our work, and > > one that is currently the only technique for WCAG SC 1.3.5 "Purpose of > > Input" is @autocomplete - where we essentially reverse-engineered that > > attribute's intent (which was initially intended to simply assist in > > filling forms) by noting that besides performing an action, we could use > > that attribute and its fixed taxonomy list (tokens) to also output > > information about the input in "different modalities". But at the end of > > the day, that particular attribute does NOT provide any adaptations - it > > simply tells user-agents what data to inject into form inputs. > > > > I realise it is likely now too late to reverse things - the fiat decision > > <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fiat#:~:text=1%20:%20an%20authoritative%20or%20arbitrary,world%20was%20created%20by%20fiat.> has > > been made, and life moves on. But I remain quite unhappy with how this all > > evolved; it was very un-W3C-process > > <https://www.w3.org/2021/Process-20211102/#Consensus>-like. > > > > JF > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 3:26 PM Lionel Wolberger <lionel@userway.org> > > wrote: > > > >> Dear Public-Personalization-Tf, > >> > >> We just completed the WAI Coordination Call, Janina, Matt, Sharon and > >> Lionel attending representing Personalization, Shawn and Brent representing > >> EO, as well as others. After a discussion where all issues that we have > >> raised were aired, the decision was made: > >> > >> WAI-Adapt > >> > >> WAI-EO will consider composing a tagline, a short descriptor that would > >> appear alongside it for example on the TPAC Introductory Slide. > >> > >> Thanks for a good process surrounding this, > >> > >> - Lionel > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Lionel Wolberger > >> COO, UserWay Inc. > >> lionel@userway.org > >> UserWay.org <http://userway.org/> > >> <https://userway.org/>[image: text] > >> > > > > > > -- > > *John Foliot* | > > Senior Industry Specialist, Digital Accessibility | > > W3C Accessibility Standards Contributor | > > > > "I made this so long because I did not have time to make it shorter." - > > Pascal "links go places, buttons do things" > > > > > > > > -- > *John Foliot* | > Senior Industry Specialist, Digital Accessibility | > W3C Accessibility Standards Contributor | > > "I made this so long because I did not have time to make it shorter." - > Pascal "links go places, buttons do things" -- Janina Sajka (she/her/hers) https://linkedin.com/in/jsajka Linux Foundation Fellow Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup: http://a11y.org The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) Co-Chair, Accessible Platform Architectures http://www.w3.org/wai/apa
Received on Thursday, 7 April 2022 14:03:55 UTC