Re: CTAUR: proposed additional requirement for distraction avoidance in collaborative editing

Hi All:

I have just reviewed 4 PR in the CTAUR repository. Yes, I was surprised
to find 4 as I was expecting only 3.

I defer to Jason on the order of the merges, but I see no reason not to
merge 61, 62, and 653.

I'm a bit confused about 60. Unlike the others mentioned, this one
appears to edit throughout the CTAUR document. Still, I have no
objection as we should apply all our existing edits, imo, before I take
a deep pass to introduce more mention of other collaborative
environments. I also intend to try and better clarify that we're
addressing AUR for collaboration only, and not for the type of content
on which a group is collaborating as this appears to continue to confuse
some of our readers.

Best,
Janina


Scott Hollier writes:
> TO Jason
> 
> I agree ??? happy for that one ot be merged too.
> 
> Scot.
> 
> 
> Dr Scott Hollier
> CEO & Co-founder
> [Centre for Accessibility Australia logo]<https://www.accessibility.org.au/>
> Centre For Accessibility Australia Ltd.
> Phone: +61 (0)430 351 909
> Email: scott.hollier@accessibility.org.au<mailto:scott.hollier@accessibility.org.au>
> Address: Suite 5, Belmont Hub, 213 Wright Street, Cloverdale WA 6105
> 
> accessibility.org.au<https://www.accessibility.org.au/>
> Subscribe to our newsletter<http://eepurl.com/drA-ib>
> [Instagram icon]<https://www.instagram.com/centreforaccessibility/> [Facebook icon] <https://www.facebook.com/centreforaccessibility>  [Twitter icon] <https://twitter.com/centrefora11y>  [LinkedIn icon] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/centreforaccessibility/>
> 
> CFA Australia respectfully acknowledges the Traditional Owners of Country across Australia and pay our respects to Elders past, present and emerging
> 
> 
> From: Jason J.G. White <jason@jasonjgw.net>
> Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2024 10:16 PM
> To: Scott Hollier <scott.hollier@accessibility.org.au>; RQTF <public-rqtf@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: CTAUR: proposed additional requirement for distraction avoidance in collaborative editing
> 
> 
> 
> On 18/1/24 00:18, Scott Hollier wrote:
> 
> I've also reviewed the other issues, all good to be merged in my view.
> 
> Thank you, Scott. Let's note any other reviews that come in by tomorrow at 1400 UTC, and make a merging decision.
> 
> I know the additional pull request I created yesterday is not subject to our review deadline. However, I think it would be reasonable for us to merge it, unless someone wants more time and opportunity to review first.
> 
> If you want more time to review, please notify us before tomorrow at 1400 UTC.
> 
> Also, we can of course continue to make changes after we've merged the pull requests, so this decision is not particularly significant anyway.







-- 

Janina Sajka (she/her/hers)
Accessibility Consultant https://linkedin.com/in/jsajka

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
Co-Chair, Accessible Platform Architectures	http://www.w3.org/wai/apa

Linux Foundation Fellow
https://www.linuxfoundation.org/board-of-directors-2/

Received on Friday, 19 January 2024 07:19:24 UTC