W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-pfwg@w3.org > December 2014

Re: On editorial notes, the term "at-risk", and UA reqs for mainstream UI changes (Was: PFWG-ISSUE-690)

From: Gunderson, Jon R <jongund@illinois.edu>
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 20:29:11 +0000
To: John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>, "'James Craig'" <jcraig@apple.com>, "'WAI XTech'" <wai-xtech@w3.org>, "'W3C WAI Protocols & Formats'" <public-pfwg@w3.org>
CC: "'Ted O'Connor'" <eoconnor@apple.com>, "'David Singer'" <singer@apple.com>
Message-ID: <D0AF5A93.2D329%jongund@illinois.edu>
+1 on JF comments

On 12/11/14, 12:53 PM, "John Foliot" <john@foliot.ca> wrote:

>James Craig wrote:
>> Even though the term has been in the published working draft for six
>> months, the editorial note reference of "at-risk" seems to be a primary
>> objection.
>Hi James,
>I just wanted to jump in here to a) say thanks for making this editorial
>change, and b) I personally felt that you were NOT wrong in pointing out
>editorial note in the current draft. While it is/was somewhat unusual to
>the language you chose (the new edit is much better), it WAS responsible
>you to point it out, and to ensure that there is ongoing discussion around
>this particular attribute. More than anything else, I think we need to
>continue talking about this, and your pointing it out has kicked-off that
>Also, just in case nobody has said it recently, thanks for your hard work
>and dedication to the ARIA effort - I for one do appreciate it.
>(PS - I hope you find some time to respond to some of my other questions,
>posted earlier)
Received on Thursday, 11 December 2014 20:30:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:45:16 UTC