Re: On HTML AAM deliverable

On 01/09/2016 8:37 AM, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote:
> Having a deliverable listed in a charter for the only purpose of 
> ensuring proper review is not the approach I'd like to push forward in 
> the future. 

This is not the only only reason to keep it joint. I listed several 
others at 
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2016Aug/0269.html, in 
summary:

  * Stronger mechanism to ensure consistency within the suite of
    Accessibility API Mappings, which is an ARIA-driven effort that
    involves collaboration with various content language WGs;
  * Ability to provide relevant expertise from both groups;
  * Ability to buffer ebbs and flows in participation with the two groups;
  * Ability of one group to ensure the spec goes to completion if the
    effort stalls in the other group.

If the concern were just review timelines, I would agree the spec does 
not need to be jointly owned. But I think the reasons above justify it.

Michael