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

Re: Need review today: Please review Silver acknowledgements

From: Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 14:10:20 -0400
To: Silver Editors <public-silver-editors@w3.org>, AGWG Chairs <group-ag-chairs@w3.org>
Message-ID: <72a2f2d4-532c-4166-8de7-c3051d73b337@w3.org>
BTW, lists of participants that you might want to check for missing 
names that you know of:

Silver CG: https://www.w3.org/groups/cg/silver/participants

Silver TF: https://www.w3.org/groups/tf/silver-tf

AG WG: https://www.w3.org/groups/wg/ag/participants

Michael

On 27/10/2020 1:59 p.m., Michael Cooper wrote:
>
> It turns out we (I) overlooked putting the acknowledgements section 
> into the WCAG 3 draft. I've taken a stab:
>
> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/silver/acknowledgements/guidelines/index.html#acknowledgements
>
> I used my judgement about people who have contributed, but almost 
> certainly missed people. Please let me know whom to add.
>
> I combined Silver CG and Silver TF because they operate as a unit. 
> Normally I include company names alongside the individual, but things 
> were all over the map and I couldn't get something consistent, so I 
> just omitted that.
>
> I drew in part from an early draft:
>
> https://github.com/w3c/silver/blob/8809343c30a291bdac05d67a419fc65c0c785af3/edDraft/index.html
>
> From that, I also pulled in the "research partners" list. I didn't 
> include the Design Sprint because I don't think that rises to the 
> level of a spec acknowledgement - though perhaps those names should be 
> credited as CG participants. I'm not sure either about the research 
> partners, whether it rises to the level of belonging there, I'd like 
> input on that.
>
> Michael
>
Received on Tuesday, 27 October 2020 18:10:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 27 October 2020 18:10:24 UTC