W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-silver-editors@w3.org > November 2020

RE: Suggested shortnames for Silver

From: Chuck Adams <charles.adams@oracle.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 08:59:34 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <c8eea421-232b-4c76-aa65-bc714cf5affa@default>
To: Rachael Montgomery <rachael@accessiblecommunity.org>, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>, AGWG Chairs <group-ag-chairs@w3.org>, Silver Editors <public-silver-editors@w3.org>, Philippe Le Hégaret <plh@w3.org>, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
No strong opinion, I lean towards “wcag-3” and not “wcag-3.x”, as it seems “wcag-3” would be a good reference to a living standard that allows the “dot x” to change.





From: Rachael Montgomery <rachael@accessiblecommunity.org> 
Sent: Wednesday, November 4, 2020 7:47 AM
To: Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>; AGWG Chairs <group-ag-chairs@w3.org>; Silver Editors <public-silver-editors@w3.org>; Philippe Le Hégaret <plh@w3.org>; Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
Subject: RE: Suggested shortnames for Silver


I don’t have a strong opinion either. 

On Nov 4, 2020, 9:38 AM -0500, Alastair Campbell <HYPERLINK "mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com"acampbell@nomensa.com>, wrote:

I’m afraid I don’t feel particularly strongly either way, so long as the ‘traditional’ WCAG style works.


Have we made a decision about WCAG 3 being a ‘living standard’ or whether it will have version numbers? That would impact the need for “-3.0”, otherwise it could be “wcag-3”.





From: Michael Cooper <HYPERLINK "mailto:cooper@w3.org"cooper@w3.org>
Sent: 04 November 2020 12:58
To: AGWG Chairs <HYPERLINK "mailto:group-ag-chairs@w3.org"group-ag-chairs@w3.org>; Silver Editors <HYPERLINK "mailto:public-silver-editors@w3.org"public-silver-editors@w3.org>; Philippe Le Hégaret <HYPERLINK "mailto:plh@w3.org"plh@w3.org>
Subject: Suggested shortnames for Silver


Up to now, we've been kind of assuming Silver (WCAG 3) will have a shortname patterned like WCAG 2. (The shortname is the part that appears after TR in the URI, sometimes collated with a date, such as HYPERLINK "https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!JSnEj7EusslsiCVAOgikmGUtJY40VkUSdq21eWUQ1J1ULXALjKZ5R-O1GXqdCJsY-A$"https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/.) A couple things aren't great about this pattern:

Most W3C documents use lowercased shortnames, it's unusual to have an uppercase one.
The lack of punctuation makes it ambiguous whether the version is 3.0 or 30.

I would like to address this by making the shortname for the Silver guidelines "wcag-3.0". Thus, the TR publication URI would be HYPERLINK "https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.w3.org/TR/wcag-3.0/__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!JSnEj7EusslsiCVAOgikmGUtJY40VkUSdq21eWUQ1J1ULXALjKZ5R-O1GXoGRCgR2Q$"https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag-3.0/.

The Requirements document should follow a similar pattern, though in that case I'd like to drop the "dot" from it so it applies to all editions of WCAG 3. Therefore the shortname would be "wcag-3-requirements" and the TR publication URI HYPERLINK "https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.w3.org/TR/wcag-3-requirements/__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!JSnEj7EusslsiCVAOgikmGUtJY40VkUSdq21eWUQ1J1ULXALjKZ5R-O1GXqUUZAmsg$"https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag-3-requirements/.

What are your thoughts? I expect Judy and Shawn Henry not to support this initially, as they would probably prioritize consistency with the past. But I think a once-per-decade major update is the best opportunity to break away from that in favour of something more clear. I think the increased clarity outweighs consistency with the past. (N.B., we would probably set up redirects so if someone tries to go to HYPERLINK "https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.w3.org/TR/WCAG30/__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!JSnEj7EusslsiCVAOgikmGUtJY40VkUSdq21eWUQ1J1ULXALjKZ5R-O1GXp7-ZNHYg$"https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG30/, they would be redirected rather than find it a broken link, so we're not breaking things for people used to the old pattern.)

Received on Friday, 6 November 2020 17:00:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 6 November 2020 17:00:03 UTC