FW: Straw man list for WCAG.NEXT, another proposal...

Somehow this didn't make it to the list.


From: White, Jason J
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2016 9:18 AM
To: 'John Foliot'
Subject: RE: Straw man list for WCAG.NEXT, another proposal...



From: John Foliot [mailto:john.foliot@deque.com]
Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2016 11:08 PM
My only concern with a single roll-up is the impact it will have on delivery date. We are famous (or is that infamous?) for examining everything from every possible angle, which is both a good thing and a bad thing, and so I would be a lot happier if we had "break-points" at which time we release what we are happy with, and continue to work on that which we are not yet happy with: that we not be held hostage to the clock.

I would countenance this if it were possible to be sure that later additions wouldn't require changes to be made in the extension already completed. It's only possible if we can be sure of having relatively independent success criteria and of getting them "right the first time".

> If it had been my decision, I wouldn't have created the task forces - or I would have limited them to use cases and requirement gathering.

Your closing statement is also one I fully agree with. Unfortunately, I believe that this situation came about because not enough public dialog happened, that some decisions were made by a small group, without polling the larger community. That's the primary reason why I am pushing on this WCAG.next issue now, and in public. I think we can get this back on track.

I agree.


________________________________

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.


Thank you for your compliance.

________________________________