- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2017 08:29:17 +0100
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
On 07/04/2017 03:59, Jonathan Avila wrote: > I’ll throw in my two cents – what has been most frustrating for me has > been that we have been working on these criteria for over 3 years in the > case of the mobile task force and we solicited help from all W3C members > and welcomed invited experts to the table. Unfortunately some of the > larger companies that now are raising concerns did not jump in before > now even though we requested and welcomed their assistance. These > companies have the ability to dedicate resources to this task and we > could be further along now and have less at risk success criteria had > some of these organizations with concerns come to the table sooner. At > each stage over the last three years as new people have come into the > TFs and lists we have to repeat and reiterate the same concerns and > arguments over several times and go back and forth over wording > sometimes reverting back to what we had before. Releasing the WCAG 2.1 > FPWD certainly received more high level attention than original mobile > TF note in my opinion and finally brought out the stakeholders that we > needed access to and dialog with all along. Part of me thinks this is inherent with the way (or perhaps the perception of the way) W3C/WAI works, with task forces, membership to working groups, invited experts etc, rather than working completely in the open / open to all (while of course there's no hard door slam for non-members, it's still the impression that the average developer may have...and it's exemplified by having a First *Public* Working Draft, which suggests any previous work was no "public"). P -- Patrick H. Lauke www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
Received on Friday, 7 April 2017 07:29:42 UTC