Re: charter update with two year cycle

HI Katie,



Firstly:

> “This group, which has felt like home to me, has changed, and has not been the open-armed welcoming place, where all were *heard* and appreciated for their own perspective and experience.“



I’m sorry if my emails come across as argumentative or as not listening, that is not my intent.



On this topic in particular (where I don’t have in-depth experience with Government processes) I have tried to take an approach of identifying the key differences and pushing on those to understand, but that might come across too aggressively, I’m sorry.





For Wilco’s points (his email arrived as my previous one left), I think the initial thing is to come up with a good ‘pitch’, and discuss that with people like the one Gregg suggested.



> “To the pro-2 year people, is there anything you can think of that can help address the concerns of the people who are against it?”



For Governments that specify a version of a standard (which is not all of them) and have very long time-frames: I would try pitching the dot-releases as regular updates they do not have to take up, but they should look to Silver / 3.0 as the next major release.



> “And for the people against the 2-year release, are there anything you can think of that would allow for faster release of success criteria, while keeping to a 5+ year WCAG update schedule?”



Unfortunately, the faster release of normative SCs is the issue, if people still agree with the approach of having 2.1 rather than extensions (which I do), then we are talking about updates to normative WCAG.



If we try to get all the SCs from the tasks forces into 2.1, we are in a situation of: Quick, Good, Cheap – pick any two.



·         Quick & Good: We’d need to hire several FTE people to work on it, like WCAG 2.0 effectively had (is that an option?).

·         Quick & cheap: Inconsistent guidelines that fail all concerned.

·         Good & cheap: Next version in 5+ years.



None of those are good options, so to me that is why we need an iterative/dot-release approach, to get around the quick/cheap/good issue by releasing new SCs in smaller chunks.



Am I missing something?



Cheers,



-Alastair