AW: RE: publish WCAG2ICT as a W3C Statement instead of a WG Note?

I tried to find the main difference between statement and note. It seems to be the formal endorsement by W3C:
- group note “These notes have not received formal review and are not endorsed W3C.”
- statement “These statements have been formally reviewed and are endorsed W3C.”

My understanding is that a group note can become a statement (“These notes MUST NOT be cited as W3C standards and may or may not become W3C Statements.”). So let's stick with the group note to speed up drafting, and perhaps decide later whether or not to expand the document as a "statement".



Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Thorsten Katzmann
Senior Standards and Compliance Program Manager
IBM Technical Relations Europe
+49-1707966354
thorsten.katzmann@de.ibm.com<mailto:thorsten.katzmann@de.ibm.com>

IBM Deutschland GmbH
IBM-Allee 1
71139 Ehningen

IBM Data Privacy Statement<https://www.ibm.com/privacy>

IBM Deutschland GmbH
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Sebastian Krause
Geschäftsführung: Gregor Pillen (Vorsitzender), Gabriele Schwarenthorer, Christine Rupp, Christian Noll, Nicole Reimer, Frank Theisen
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Ehningen / Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 14562 / WEEE-Reg.-Nr. DE 99369940

Von: Gregg Vanderheiden RTF <gregg@raisingthefloor.org>
Gesendet: Dienstag, 4. Oktober 2022 06:13
An: Mary Jo Mueller <maryjom@us.ibm.com>
Cc: public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org
Betreff: [EXTERNAL] RE: publish WCAG2ICT as a W3C Statement instead of a WG Note?

I thought statements were more for Position Papers or such. WCAG2ICT was commissioned by the Access Board and others to provide guidance or our opinion on IF and HOW WCAG might be used for broader ICT Specifically it was to answer the question
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization.
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd

I thought statements were more for Position Papers or such.   WCAG2ICT was commissioned by the Access Board and others to provide guidance or our opinion on IF and HOW WCAG might be used for broader ICT

Specifically it was to answer the question  (can WCAG apply if you just substitute     "non-web content" (or e-document) and "software" for  Web pages and have them apply.

So I THINK that we should keep it as a technical report or note - rather than as a position statement.

But I am interested in hearing why making it a statement was suggested.
It just seems to me to be different than a statement at this point

Gregg



On Oct 3, 2022, at 6:39 PM, Mary Jo Mueller <maryjom@us.ibm.com<mailto:maryjom@us.ibm.com>> wrote:


  1.  (Shadi) Whether we might publish WCAG2ICT as a W3C Statement instead of a WG Note? If so, might be useful to list this as either in scope or out of scope, to avoid this question coming up again in the future.

Mary Jo: IMO, this is a possibility. Need to have that conversation with the TF leadership to determine what would it require to be published as a W3C statement. Personally, I’m unfamiliar with that type of document and what it would entail to become a W3C statement. If it requires a lot more time and effort, doing so might be delayed to get a Note published in time for use in regulatory work. We could add to the work statement that there is the potential for this to eventually become a W3C statement.

Do others have thoughts or concerns with this being published as a W3C Statement?  Here’s a link to a description of a W3C Statement<https://www.w3.org/standards/types#STMT> vs. Working Group Note<https://www.w3.org/standards/types#NOTE>. Please weigh in.

If there are no concerns, we could add to the in-scope a bullet that says:

·         Seeking W3C endorsement to publish the WCAG2ICT document as a W3C Statement (a form of W3C Technical Report)

Received on Thursday, 6 October 2022 10:35:50 UTC