RE: should we have a 2 year refresh cycle or a 4-5 year refresh cycle

Dear WCAG WG,

 

After a polite, in the background, dressing-down from Andrew, which is his job as chair, I would like to apologize for the tone of the following statement:

 

​​​​​“…….Waiting would be more prudent, but calmer heads do not seem to be listening. They are listening to the very AC Reps of companies who would just love to see Section 508 and the ADA updates be undone, delayed or expelled….. ”

 

This is the first time in my 16 years on this working group that I have been asked to keep a respectful tone. And, I didn’t do that.

 

But, hopefully, for those who know me, it just shows my level of frustration and concern that we are painting ourselves into an untenable corner, by thinking we can or should, try to build this standard like a web language or software application - in an agile fashion that we can fix next month. Those technologies are not taken up by civil rights laws and policies around the world. It is just not the same thing, and can’t be treated the same.

 

Additionally, my statement is still a very real concern. 

 

I am asking for compromise here, again, there is a space between 10 and 2 years for saying we will provide a new standard.

 

 

 

* katie *

 

Katie Haritos-Shea 
Principal ICT Accessibility Architect (WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA)

 

Cell: 703-371-5545 |  <mailto:ryladog@gmail.com> ryladog@gmail.com | Oakton, VA |  <http://www.linkedin.com/in/katieharitosshea/> LinkedIn Profile | Office: 703-371-5545 |  <https://twitter.com/Ryladog> @ryladog

 

From: Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL [mailto:ryladog@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 1:24 PM
To: 'White, Jason J' <jjwhite@ets.org>; 'Alastair Campbell' <acampbell@nomensa.com>; 'David MacDonald' <david100@sympatico.ca>; 'WCAG' <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Cc: 'CAE-Vanderhe' <gregg@raisingthefloor.org>
Subject: RE: should we have a 2 year refresh cycle or a 4-5 year refresh cycle

 

You are not wrong. Waiting would be more prudent, but calmer heads do not seem to be listening. They are listening to the the very AC Reps of companies who would just love to see Section 508 and the ADA updates be undone, delayed or expelled…..we have to compromise on some issues…. 

 

​​​​​

 

 

 

* katie *

 

Katie Haritos-Shea 
Principal ICT Accessibility Architect (WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA)

 

Cell: 703-371-5545 |  <mailto:ryladog@gmail.com> ryladog@gmail.com | Oakton, VA |  <http://www.linkedin.com/in/katieharitosshea/> LinkedIn Profile | Office: 703-371-5545 |  <https://twitter.com/Ryladog> @ryladog

 

From: White, Jason J [mailto:jjwhite@ets.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 1:04 PM
To: Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL <ryladog@gmail.com <mailto:ryladog@gmail.com> >; 'Alastair Campbell' <acampbell@nomensa.com <mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com> >; 'David MacDonald' <david100@sympatico.ca <mailto:david100@sympatico.ca> >; 'WCAG' <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org <mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> >
Cc: 'CAE-Vanderhe' <gregg@raisingthefloor.org <mailto:gregg@raisingthefloor.org> >
Subject: RE: should we have a 2 year refresh cycle or a 4-5 year refresh cycle

 

 

 

From: Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL [mailto:ryladog@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 12:35 PM

Jason,

 

I have to say that I am against NOT providing a regular updated cycle for organizations and government to begin to plan for – and this can include Sliver. I think we need that.

[Jason] Is it really possible to establish such expectations at present? In the first place, there is disagreement about what the update plans should be. Second, we haven’t had the experience of developing WCAG 2.1 as an extension to 2.0 while striving to meet a fairly ambitious schedule. Third, any subsequent versions would require Charter approval from the W3C membership.

I think that subsequent plans would be better decided after 2.1 is completed.

 

 

  _____  

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.

  _____