Re: I will vote against WCAG 2.1 Draft

> Wayne Dick <mailto:wayneedick@gmail.com>
> 20 February 2017 at 18:47
> Patrick gave me a link to a mobile phone spoofer for Firefox, called 
> User Agent Switcher. So I can read Github easily now.
I'm really glad to hear that you can access GH better now. This would be 
good for other members of the LVTF -
so maybe share the extension with the group.

Sincere apologies that there are issues with these tools for VIP, and 
thanks also to Patrick for chipping in with a practical solution.
I hope this helps remove some barriers to participation for you and others.

Thanks

Josh
>
> Seeing the whole thing I kind of think we should just publish what we 
> have approved. Many of the LV SCs are not in their most evolved 
> forms.  I know we took a vote, and I gave a +1, but seeing it now the 
> incomplete SCs look too incomplete. I'm worried they will create more 
> confusion than stimulate meaningful discussion.
>
> Wayne
>
>
>
>
> Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL <mailto:ryladog@gmail.com>
> 20 February 2017 at 18:36
>
> +1 to Greggs comments, which could be in the ‘At Risk’ (or some such 
> name) section……
>
> ​ ​​​​** katie **
>
> *Katie Haritos-Shea**
> **Principal ICT Accessibility Architect (WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA)*
>
> *Cell: 703-371-5545 **|****ryladog@gmail.com* 
> <mailto:ryladog@gmail.com>***|****Oakton, VA **|****LinkedIn Profile* 
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/katieharitosshea/>***|****Office: 
> 703-371-5545 **|****@ryladog* <https://twitter.com/Ryladog>*
>
> *NOTE: The content of this email should be construed to always be an 
> expression of my own personal independent opinion, unless I identify 
> that I am speaking on behalf of Knowbility, as their AC Rep at the W3C 
> - and - that my personal email never expresses the opinion of my 
> employer, Deque Systems.**
>
> *From:*White, Jason J [mailto:jjwhite@ets.org]
> *Sent:* Monday, February 20, 2017 1:28 PM
> *To:* Gregg C Vanderheiden <greggvan@umd.edu>; David MacDonald 
> <david100@sympatico.ca>
> *Cc:* Wayne Dick <wayneedick@gmail.com>; w3c-waI-gl@w3. org 
> <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> *Subject:* RE: I will vote against WCAG 2.1 Draft
>
> +1 to Gregg’s comments, which are in line with how the working group 
> has historically operated in publishing drafts.
>
> White, Jason J <mailto:jjwhite@ets.org>
> 20 February 2017 at 18:28
>
> +1 to Gregg’s comments, which are in line with how the working group 
> has historically operated in publishing drafts.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 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.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Gregg C Vanderheiden <mailto:greggvan@umd.edu>
> 20 February 2017 at 18:26
> I do not agree that you we should release SC for public comment that 
> do not meet the criteria for an SC.
>
> if they do not qualify — they are not SC.
>
> If we want to release those that DO qualify
> AND ALSO get help on other ones that DON’T YET
>
> Then we could have an *additional* *section below *the ones that 
> qualify  that says.
>
>   * the following are things we would like to see but they do not
>     qualify for the reasons stated under each one.
>   * if people know of ways to modify these so they would qualify - we
>     would much like to see your ideas
>
>
>
>
> X1:  SHORT NAME OF #1:    Text of the thing we would like to make into 
> an SC
>
>   * reason #1  — and why               [ For example       * Not
>     testable — because it contains the phrase  “must be easy” but
>     “easy” is not a testable term ]
>   * reason #2 (if there are more than 1) — and why       [ example  
>     *Not broadly applicable — because this can only be met by markup
>     languages ]
>
>
>
> X2:  SHORT NAME OF #2:  text of 2
>
>   * reason #1 - and why
>
>
> etc
>
>
> That way we
>
>  1. don’t make it look like we can include things we can’t — and then
>     disappoint people when we drop all the ones we can’t
>  2. we get people who want them in there to give us their best effort
>     in getting them into shape 
>
>
>
> Gregg
>
>
>
> Gregg C Vanderheiden
> greggvan@umd.edu <mailto:greggvan@umd.edu>
>
>
>
>
> David MacDonald <mailto:david100@sympatico.ca>
> 20 February 2017 at 17:36
> While I agree that there has not been complete WG consensus for 23 of 
> the 25 new SCs, I would also say that the Task forces worked hard on 
> the SCs that were submitted as issues, and by their submission as 
> Issues, it means they had consensus of at least the task forces that 
> created them.
>
> I was against the idea of releasing working drafts on a set schedule, 
> but since the group made that decision, then I support the group 
> consensus to do so.
>
> Although there are a number of SCs which do not meet all the 
> requirements for SCs, I think we should go forward and see what the 
> public says.
>
> The other option is to wait about 9 months so that we can vet 60 
> success criteria at a rate of 2 per week. And I don't think they will 
> be that much better at that point... and if a many  of the 60 SCs are 
> rejected by the public after the FPWD we will be 9 months behind.
>
> I think the current disclaimer language strikes a good balance between 
> saying this is the best of our work so far, and it still has a long 
> way to go, and it gives the public a chance to look over our shoulders 
> before everything is baked in.
>
> Cheers,
> David MacDonald
>
> *Can**Adapt**Solutions Inc.*
>
> Tel:  613.235.4902
>
> LinkedIn
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>
>
> twitter.com/davidmacd <http://twitter.com/davidmacd>
>
> GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>
>
> www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/>
>
> /  Adapting the web to *all* users/
>
> /            Including those with disabilities/
>
> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy 
> policy <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>
>
>

-- 
Joshue O Connor
Director | InterAccess.ie