Re: CfC: Approve draft charter for AC review

But it *did* say two and biennial before people objected, didnt it? Let's be considerate please.

At the time Wayne emailed, it did not say two, that had been changed 3 days earlier, so I assumed that he was looking at the document in its current form.
AWK


On Oct 14, 2016 9:58 PM, "Andrew Kirkpatrick" <akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>> wrote:
Wayne,
The charter has no commitment to a two year plan, in fact the word “two” doesn’t appear in the charter at all.

There is a stated intent for a three year schedule: "The Working Group intends to produce updated guidance for accessibility on a regular interval of approximately three years, starting with WCAG 2.1.”

Does three years work better for you?

Thanks,
AWK

Andrew Kirkpatrick
Group Product Manager, Standards and Accessibility
Adobe

akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>
http://twitter.com/awkawk








On 10/14/16, 14:23, "Wayne Dick" <wayneedick@gmail.com<mailto:wayneedick@gmail.com>> wrote:

>I do not agree with the two year re lease plan. A two year review plan
>is good, but two year seems arbitrary. SC's are interrelated it
>doesn't make sense. it seems excessively burdensome.
>
>I know what you are trying to do, but it is not there. There need to
>be a way to balance shorter time to release and completing tasks.
>
>Wayne
>
>On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>> wrote:
>> This CFC received 18 affirmative votes and one outstanding objection. The
>> chairs feel that the objection has been considered and was partly addressed
>> by a compromise in draft charter language. Therefore, it is agreed as a
>> decision (https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/decision-policy) of the WCAG Working
>> Group to advance the draft charter for further review by W3M and the W3C AC,
>> but we will record the objection along with the decision.
>>
>> The decision is recorded at https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Decisions. The
>> one outstanding objection
>> (https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2016OctDec/0167.html) is
>> recorded via reference to this email.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> AWK
>>
>> Andrew Kirkpatrick
>> Group Product Manager, Standards and Accessibility
>> Adobe
>>
>> akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>
>> http://twitter.com/awkawk

>>
>> From: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>>
>> Date: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 at 13:10
>> To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
>> Subject: CfC: Approve draft charter for AC review
>> Resent-From: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
>> Resent-Date: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 at 13:10
>>
>> CALL FOR CONSENSUS – ends Thursday October 13 at 1:00pm Boston time.
>>
>> This is a CfC seeking WG approval to release the current draft charter for
>> AC review.  The item was surveyed, discussed on the WG call, and approved
>> (http://www.w3.org/2016/10/11-wai-wcag-minutes.html). There was much
>> discussion leading up to the call, and on the call, and the group felt that
>> a consensus opinion was reached on key items.
>>
>> Draft charter: http://www.w3.org/2016/09/draft-wcag-charter

>>
>> If you have concerns about this proposed consensus position that have not
>> been discussed already and feel that those concerns result in you “not being
>> able to live with” this position, please let the group know before the CfC
>> deadline.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> AWK
>>
>> Andrew Kirkpatrick
>> Group Product Manager, Standards and Accessibility
>> Adobe
>>
>> akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>
>> http://twitter.com/awkawk