Re: CFC: Silver TF Work Statement

Thanks Andrew,

I am mixing up my stories....:-)

Katie Haritos-Shea
703-371-5545

On Nov 2, 2016 7:27 PM, "Andrew Kirkpatrick" <akirkpat@adobe.com> wrote:

> Sorry Katie, one more small correction – the Decision process (
> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/decision-policy) was adopted September 15,
> 2015, not at TPAC 2016.
>
> Thanks,
> AWK
>
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
> Group Product Manager, Standards and Accessibility
> Adobe
>
> akirkpat@adobe.com
> http://twitter.com/awkawk
>
> From: Katie GMAIL <ryladog@gmail.com>
> Date: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 at 18:11
> To: CAE-Vanderhe <gregg@raisingthefloor.org>
> Cc: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: CFC: Silver TF Work Statement
>
> Hey All,
>
> I was wrong about CfC standing for Call for Comments. It is, in WCAG
> anyway, a new process since TPAC 2016, that does in fact mean 'Call for
> Consensus'.
>
> I stand corrected.....:-)
>
> Katie Haritos-Shea
> 703-371-5545
>
> On Nov 1, 2016 8:00 PM, "Katie Haritos-Shea" <ryladog@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I would also like to note that CfC were implemented to allow for
>> assynchronous participation and involvement, for folks who could not make
>> the calls. And CfC is a 'Call for comments', not a call for 'Can you live
>> with this'. Gregg made a comment.
>>
>> If you are changing the process of CfC please let the group vote on that.
>>
>> Katie Haritos-Shea
>> 703-371-5545
>>
>> On Nov 1, 2016 7:47 PM, "Gregg Vanderheiden RTF" <
>> gregg@raisingthefloor.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I already said that this was not a MUST HAVE (see below) — so we are
>>> already in a  “can live with” situation.
>>>
>>> G
>>>
>>>
>>> ( I would advise that we look at broadening the language soon however to
>>> get things pointed in the right direction and to engage people that are
>>> thinking future (and we need) but that won’t be interested in editing/
>>> adding another SC. )
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 1, 2016, at 4:48 PM, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I don’t think that the existing statement is ignoring future technology
>>> advance, it is just being very open-ended:
>>> "These guidelines will address current technological and cultural web
>>> accessibility requirements and provide a base for continued evolution of
>>> the guidelines.”
>>>
>>> As this has been surveyed for feedback and discussed on the call as
>>> well, the question that I need to ask Gregg is whether you can live with it
>>> as written. This is the key question for EVERY CfC because we kick off the
>>> CfC when the chairs feel that there has been opportunity for discussion on
>>> a topic (list discussion, survey, telecon) and a group consensus has
>>> emerged.  It is not the time to offer minor tweaks, it is the time to ask
>>> “Can I live with this?”.
>>>
>>> As this is a simple work statement, we can change this at any time, so
>>> I’m not particularly worried about this getting changed if it needs to. I’m
>>> more worried about our ability to efficiently execute CfC’s without needing
>>> to restart the review clock for small changes that may not be essential.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> AWK
>>>
>>> Andrew Kirkpatrick
>>> Group Product Manager, Standards and Accessibility
>>> Adobe
>>>
>>> akirkpat@adobe.com
>>> http://twitter.com/awkawk
>>>
>>> From: Katie GMAIL <ryladog@gmail.com>
>>> Date: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 at 16:28
>>> To: "'White, Jason J'" <jjwhite@ets.org>, CAE-Vanderhe <
>>> gregg@raisingthefloor.org>, Jeanne Spellman <
>>> jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com>
>>> Cc: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
>>> Subject: RE: CFC: Silver TF Work Statement
>>> Resent-From: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
>>> Resent-Date: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 at 16:29
>>>
>>> +1 – I also like Gregg’s second edits
>>>
>>> ​​​​​
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ** katie **
>>>
>>> *Katie Haritos-Shea*
>>> *Principal ICT Accessibility Architect (WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA)*
>>>
>>> *Cell: 703-371-5545 <703-371-5545> **|**ryladog@gmail.com*
>>> <ryladog@gmail.com>*|**Oakton, VA **|**LinkedIn Profile*
>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/katieharitosshea/>*|**Office: 703-371-5545
>>> <703-371-5545> **|**@ryladog* <https://twitter.com/Ryladog>
>>>
>>> *From:* White, Jason J [mailto:jjwhite@ets.org <jjwhite@ets.org>]
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 1, 2016 4:14 PM
>>> *To:* Gregg Vanderheiden <gregg@raisingthefloor.org>; Jeanne Spellman <
>>> jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com>
>>> *Cc:* GLWAI Guidelines WG org <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
>>> *Subject:* RE: CFC: Silver TF Work Statement
>>>
>>> +1 to Gregg’s paragraph and to his partial but insightful list of
>>> upcoming technological developments.
>>>
>>> *From:* Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto:gregg@raisingthefloor.org
>>> <gregg@raisingthefloor.org>]
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 1, 2016 4:10 PM
>>> *To:* Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com>
>>> *Cc:* GLWAI Guidelines WG org <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
>>> *Subject:* Re: CFC: Silver TF Work Statement
>>>
>>> Sounds fine to me.
>>>
>>> Was just trying to make it sound like more than just  "and future
>>> technologies”  that sounds more like boiler plate.    Was trying to point
>>> to at least one development (perhaps the most disruptive development) that
>>> really calls for us to rethink accessibility going forward.     But we also
>>> need to look at the marriage of content and authorship and user agents.
>>>  soooo
>>>
>>> how about the following  to stimulate with out focusing on just what I
>>> had.
>>>
>>> I think this will be the most read paragraph — and it is good to get
>>> people thinking broadly ( I think just saying Future tech will not inspire
>>> any thought —  nor inspire any forward thinking people or technologists to
>>> join us - which we need.   )
>>>
>>> but this is not a  MUST HAVE if people are not comfortable adding it.
>>> I just think it makes the objective more interesting — and get us thinking
>>> beyond “fixing/adding SC” .
>>>
>>> Objective
>>> The objective of the task force is to perform preliminary development of
>>> a new version of Accessibility Guidelines following a research-focused,
>>> user-centered design methodology to produce the most effective and flexible
>>> outcome. Code-named "Silver", these guidelines will address the process of
>>> making content and functionality accessible to people with disabilities,
>>> including the roles of content authoring, user agent support, and authoring
>>> tool support. These guidelines will address current technological and
>>> cultural web accessibility requirements, but also look to where the web
>>> and broadening internet technologies are headed (conversational interfaces,
>>> the merging of content and authoring, access beyond http, custom user
>>> agents, and more), in order to provide a base for continued evolution
>>> of the guidelines.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *gregg*
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 1, 2016, at 1:51 PM, Jeanne Spellman <
>>> jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I like the idea, although I don't think that verbal and conversational
>>> interfaces should have a special callout, as that implies that it would be
>>> the focus of new technologies we are addressing.  We certainly want to
>>> include them, but not to the exclusion of others.  It brings too much
>>> attention to them, IMO.
>>> How about this language?
>>> These guidelines will address technological and cultural web
>>> accessibility requirements. These guidelines strive to anticipate where the
>>> web and other internet technologies are headed so that the guidelines can
>>> continue to evolve.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/1/2016 1:11 PM, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
>>>
>>> Friendly amendment
>>>
>>> I think that the objective should contain something that relates to
>>>  future technologies.
>>>
>>> Objective
>>> The objective of the task force is to perform preliminary development of
>>> a new version of Accessibility Guidelines following a research-focused,
>>> user-centered design methodology to produce the most effective and flexible
>>> outcome. Code-named "Silver", these guidelines will address the process of
>>> making content and functionality accessible to people with disabilities,
>>> including the roles of content authoring, user agent support, and authoring
>>> tool support. These guidelines will address current technological and
>>> cultural web accessibility requirements, but also look to where the web
>>> and broadening internet technologies are headed, including verbal and
>>> conversational interfaces, in order to and provide a base for continued
>>> evolution of the guidelines.
>>>
>>> *gregg*
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 1, 2016, at 12:57 PM, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 to this CfC
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> AWK
>>>
>>> Andrew Kirkpatrick
>>> Group Product Manager, Standards and Accessibility
>>> Adobe
>>>
>>> akirkpat@adobe.com
>>> http://twitter.com/awkawk
>>>
>>> *From: *"josh@interaccess.ie" <josh@interaccess.ie>
>>> *Reply-To: *"josh@interaccess.ie" <josh@interaccess.ie>
>>> *Date: *Tuesday, November 1, 2016 at 12:46
>>> *To: *WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
>>> *Subject: *CFC: Silver TF Work Statement
>>> *Resent-From: *WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
>>> *Resent-Date: *Tuesday, November 1, 2016 at 12:43
>>>
>>> CALL FOR CONSENSUS – ends Thursday Nov 3rd at 5:00pm Boston time.
>>>
>>> This is a proposed work statement for the Silver TF that was surveyed,
>>> discussed on the WG call, and approved (http://www.w3.org/2016/11/01-
>>> wai-wcag-minutes.html).
>>>
>>> The original TF work statement can be seen:  https://www.w3.org/WAI/
>>> GL/task-forces/silver/work-statement
>>>
>>> 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
>>>
>>> Joshue O Connor | Director
>>> *InterAccess.ie <http://interaccess.ie/> - Accessible UX*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>