Re: Process

At 8:09 AM -0800 11/29/00, William Loughborough wrote:
>IOW I feel really bad that we are publicly characterizing WCAG 1.0 
>in such inflammatory ways.
>All documents will have flaws but the depiction of what resulted 
>from a process in which so many participated *so effectively* as 
>"not clear enough" and "poorly edited" while others (such as EOWG) 
>are trying to use it as our public face is counter-productive.

I'm sorry if criticism of WCAG 1.0 is not allowed, even within the
working group.

I don't, however, consider the working group list discussion to be
"public" in nature, and for the most part, I do not go around openly
criticizing WCAG 1.0.

I understand that some of you have personal investments in WCAG 1.0
thanks to your work, and I am appreciative of the time and energy
invested in writing that document.  My comments are not meant to
inflame nor to make you feel bad.

I also apologize to the emperor for the comment about his clothes,
too.

--Kynn
-- 
Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>
http://www.kynn.com/

Received on Wednesday, 29 November 2000 12:03:16 UTC