Re: CTAUR Updates Branch Available

Thanks, Jason. I appreciate both of your edits. So, are we ready to
merge to main? That would setup an update to our latest published
working draft, which we'll need then to request from Roy.

I think it would be good if our resolution at our next telecon, assuming
we have consensus, is for Roy to update the working draft based on the
current Editor's Draft. That way Dave can point to our latest as most
responsive to the issues filed on earlier drafts and setup the best
possible conversation when COGA people join us to review our disposition
of their filed issues.

Best,
Janina

Jason White writes:
> Thank you, Janina.
> 
> I pushed a change to your branch that uses ReSpec cross-reference syntax to
> include the section number of the destination automatically. It generates
> the link text of the cross-reference if you leave the anchor element empty.
> 
> In section 1.2, I also pushed a change to clarify the discussion of
> synchronous (real-time) and asynchronous editing. You are, of course,
> welcome to revert or modify my proposals.
> 
> Otherwise, I support merging Janina's revisions.
> 
> On 1/3/24 13:08, Janina Sajka wrote:
> > Colleagues:
> > 
> > I've concluded additional edits and believe the branch below is very
> > nearly the content we'd like in our updated working draft. Please review
> > and advise:
> > 
> > http://raw.githack.com/w3c/ctaur/js2402a/
> > 
> > Best,
> > Janina
> > 
> > Jason White writes:
> > > Thank you, Janina, for documenting that plan.
> > > 
> > > On 28/2/24 09:21, Janina Sajka wrote:
> > > > Dear Jason, All:
> > > > 
> > > > I have pushed an edit addressing your point re the Abstract just in the
> > > > past hour. Please advise whether it satisfies.
> > > > 
> > > > Also, I agree regarding Sec. 1.2, but that edit is likely to need a
> > > > couple days.
> > > > 
> > > > Best,
> > > > Janina
> > > > 
> > > > Jason White writes:
> > > > > On 26/2/24 19:53, Janina Sajka wrote:
> > > > > > Note that I may make additional edits ahead of our meeting, so feel free
> > > > > > to suggest edits in reply to this message ahead of our call.
> > > > > Thank you, Janina. Based on an initial reading, I would make the following
> > > > > suggestions.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 1. In the abstract, "examples of the former" is ambiguous due to recent
> > > > > editing - perhaps change it to be more specific about the type of tool.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 2. The later paragraphs of section 1.2 would, I think, benefit from
> > > > > clarification and streamlining. If you could give them a review and decide
> > > > > whether you agree, and whether there are changes you wish to make.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 3. In general, the revisions are progressing well, and in accord with Task
> > > > > Force discussions.

-- 

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 Saturday, 2 March 2024 10:44:57 UTC