Re: CFC - WCAG 3.0 Acknowledgements

Thanks +1

Homer Gaines

On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 12:30 PM Léonie Watson <lwatson@tetralogical.com>
wrote:

> Thank you Rachel.
>
> +1 to the proposal.
>
>
> On 16/02/2021 17:13, Rachael Montgomery 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/
>
> --
> Director @TetraLogical
> https://tetralogical.com/
>
>