Re: CFC - WCAG 3.0 Acknowledgements

+1

Thinking some more about how we handle credits in Hollywood, there may be cases where you’d want to have a “special thanks” if there is/are cases of someone who is not part of W3 or community groups, that donated something of value to the overall process.

Andy

> On Feb 16, 2021, at 9:13 AM, Rachael Montgomery <rachael@accessiblecommunity.org> wrote:
> 
> Leonie,
> 
> Thank you for the request. Please see below.
> 
> Enhanced Acknowledgements Proposal
> 
> Goals: 
> To have the names actually be more useful than just an undifferentiated list, but avoid the burden of maintaining specific individual contributions. 
> To have sections of Acknowledgements with people’s names in the sections.  People can be in more than one section. With a sectioned list, it is possible to narrow down who was working on specific sections and make it easier to find individual accomplishments.   
> 
> Here are the proposed sections. 
> Authors: People who wrote big swathes of WCAG3 and also the people who could be counted on to write small proposals that solved big problems.  
> 
> Subgroup Leaders: From the Subgroup list on the wiki home page.  These people deserve lots of credit.  Ping Jeanne if they need to be updated. 
> 
> Subgroup Participants: This could be grabbed from the Subgroup home pages where there is a participant list. We can ask the subgroup leaders to keep that list up to date.  
> 
> Researchers: People whose research outside of task force/working group meetings were used in  the development of WCAG 3.  This is where I see people like Andy, Mike Crabb, Joshue, Francis, Jake, Cybele, Luis, Jemma, Sarah, Dave Sloan.
> 
> Participating Contributors: The people who regularly showed up, and especially participated and scribed. This should be the people that participated regularly for more than 6 months. Regularly should be defined as at least x (3-5? 6-8?) meetings per month on average.  I don’t mean to calculate each one, but in case it is challenged, we have that definition.   
> 
> On Feb 16, 2021, 12:11 PM -0500, Léonie Watson <lwatson@tetralogical.com>, wrote:
>> Rachel,
>> 
>> Could you share the proposal in email? GoogleDocs are not usable by
>> everyone, and not available in all parts of the world.
>> 
>> Thanks
>> Léonie.
>> 
>> On 16/02/2021 15:58, Rachael Bradley Montgomery wrote:
>>> Call For Consensus — ends Friday February 19th at 10:00 Boston time.
>>> 
>>> The Working Group has discussed criteria for acknowledgement sections in
>>> WCAG 3.0
>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BjH_9iEr_JL8d7sE7BoQckmkpaDksKZiH7Q-RdDide4/edit#>
>>> at
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BjH_9iEr_JL8d7sE7BoQckmkpaDksKZiH7Q-RdDide4/edit#
>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BjH_9iEr_JL8d7sE7BoQckmkpaDksKZiH7Q-RdDide4/edit#>
>>> 
>>> Call minutes: https://www.w3.org/2021/02/09-ag-minutes.html
>>> <https://www.w3.org/2021/02/09-ag-minutes.html>
>>> 
>>> If you have concerns about this proposed consensus position that have
>>> not been discussed already and feel that those concerns result in you
>>> “not being able to live with” this decision, please let both groups know
>>> before the CfC deadline.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Kind regards,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Rachael
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Rachael Montgomery, PhD
>>> Director, Accessible Community
>>> rachael@accessiblecommunity.org <mailto:rachael@accessiblecommunity.org>
>>> 
>>> "I will paint this day with laughter;
>>> I will frame this night in song."
>>>  - Og Mandino
>>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Director @TetraLogical
>> https://tetralogical.com/