W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > October to December 2016

RE: Re[3]: charter update with two year cycle

From: White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 13:25:52 +0000
To: Katie Haritos-Shea <ryladog@gmail.com>, Joshue O Connor <josh@interaccess.ie>, "wai-wcag-editor@w3.org" <wai-wcag-editor@w3.org>
CC: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BY2PR0701MB1990FA228D911CEE7669A56CABDB0@BY2PR0701MB1990.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
I agree with Katie’s point 1 below.
Regarding point 2, I think it should be “or”, not “and” since otherwise it would refer to people who have both low vision and cognitive disabilities (i.e., people who happen to have both types of disability simultaneously), whereas it’s actually meant to refer to people with low vision or with cognitive disabilities (thus defining the populations served by these extensions).

From: Katie Haritos-Shea [mailto:ryladog@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2016 7:40 AM
To: Joshue O Connor <josh@interaccess.ie>; wai-wcag-editor@w3.org
Cc: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Re[3]: charter update with two year cycle


Josh and WCAG Editors,

Thanks, my comments are:

1. I like some of the new ideas in this version.

2. All places where it says "low vision or cognitive disabilities", please replace 'or' with 'and'. So it should read: low vision and cognitive disabilities

3. Where can we see the schedule for the updates is documented in the AG WG Project Management Plan?

Thanks!

Katie Haritos-Shea
703-371-5545

On Oct 10, 2016 6:00 AM, "josh@interaccess.ie<mailto:josh@interaccess.ie>" <josh@interaccess.ie<mailto:josh@interaccess.ie>> wrote:
Hi Katie and all,

Katie said:

>I would ask again, especially of the chairs, if a regular cycle >must be defined, why compromise, apparently, is no longer >an option in this WG any more. Why is there no ability to >compromise between 10 and 2? on say 3, 4 or 5 years?

Of course there is. All of this work is about the line between our end users requirements and the needs and wants of the group members etc. So we are working towards a compromise/workable solution. I urge everyone to take a breath. There is a new draft that the group will get a chance to give two or three cents on but we have been listening, and take very seriously yours (and others) ardent concerns. [1]

Notice that details of timeframe etc are being moved out of the charter to a seperate 'AG WG Project Management Plan' doc that is being worked on.

More details to follow.

I appreciated e'ones input on this but think it is time to find some zen space to let this evolve in a sensible way.

Thanks

Josh

[1] https://www.w3.org/2016/09/draft-wcag-charter


________________________________

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.

________________________________
Received on Monday, 10 October 2016 13:26:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:08:06 UTC