Re: New Telcon Time: Vote!

Hi, Gregory-

Gregory J. Rosmaita wrote (on 3/6/09 4:30 PM):
> 
> thanks not only for your quick response, but for taking my criticism
> in the vein it was intended -- not as a cri de coeur, 
> but constructively...

Actually, the majority of your email did not strike me as constructive,
and your subsequent emails even less so.  As I said before, simply
pointing out that the planning tool was not accessible would have sufficed.

In fact, as I said before, I expected that the data table *would* be
accessible.  It is properly marked up with headers, and a screen reader
should be able to interpret it.  Admittedly, the mouseover interaction
probably needed a focus-based equivalent.  The fact that I referred to
it as "visual output" doesn't change the fact that colors were used only
as supplementary (non-crucial) information to the contents of the table
cells.

Accessibility is not so much a technical or legal challenge as it is a
social one.  Escalating the issue, CCing other lists and other people
not in the SVG IG and not affected by the experimental telcon tracking
tool I pointed to, does not seem productive nor polite, and doesn't
promote an environment of working in good faith or with mutual respect.
 You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

Note that the telcon planning tool was not a resource on the W3C site
(nor even made by a W3C Team member), and that it wasn't intended for
widespread deployment in its current state.  It's something Cameron put
together because we found the equivalent W3C tool is too difficult to
use, and something that I thought I'd use so that I could accomplish a
short-term task.  I'd planned on making some improvements with the aim
of making it suitable for general use, and certainly making it
accessible should have been on that list, but honestly, being put on
this pillory somehow takes the wind out of my sails.

Unfortunately, after spending a few hours researching the matter, I am
no closer to solving why this table isn't accessible.  The markup is
good, and follows the guidelines I've read in various places about how
to make tables accessible.  I could update the script with functionality
I described, but deciding on a new telcon times for the SVG IG is only
one of approximately a couple hundred tasks I have that need immediate
attention, so instead, I have put together a canonical WBS poll, in the
expectation that it is already tested and is known to be accessible, if
not ideal.

Therefore, members of the SVG IG can choose between using the tool I
pointed to before, or answering the following WBS poll:
 http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/42368/svgig-telcon-2009q1/

I will still use the planning tool to collate the results.

Maybe at some point I will have time to fix the planning tool, and if
so, I will make it accessible... not because I'm obligated to by W3C,
nor for legal reasons, nor because you rose a big stink about it (in
fact, in spite of that), but because it's the right thing to do.


> PS: what IS the device independent equivalent of "paint"?

I was using the term metaphorically, to mean roughly "tag with the
selected value".  I didn't mean it as a technical term, and I don't know
of a more precise way of phrasing it.


Gregory J. Rosmaita wrote (on 3/6/09 5:19 PM):
> doug wrote:
>> But you didn't need to pull out the umbrageous WCAG 2.0 stick to 
>> beat me with...  simply pointing out that it wasn't accessible 
>> would have sufficed.
> 
> i'm not sure i understand why citing WCAG 2.0 is "unfair" or "hitting
> below the belt" 

Please don't put words in my mouth, especially out of context, CCing
people that weren't in on the original conversation.  I didn't say
either of those things, and putting them in quotes makes it look like I
did.

-Doug

Received on Saturday, 7 March 2009 03:12:22 UTC