Re: CFC - COGA document split

+1

JF

On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 10:09 AM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
wrote:

> This is a request from the Cognitive and Learning Disabilities (COGA) Task
> Force to both of COGA's parent WAI Working Groups, the Accessible Platform
> Architectures (APA) Working Group, and the Accessible Guidelines (AG)
> Working Group.
>
>
>
> This CfC seeks consensus to split the existing COGA Gap Analysis Working
> Draft publication into two separate note-track documents.
>
>
>
> As work on the existing Gap Analysis document has progressed, what began
> as an Appendix has grown in import and size to the extent that COGA now
> believes our target audience for these documents is better served by two
> separate documents rather than a single document. That is the basis for
> this CfC.
>
>
>
> If this Call for Consensus fails, no change will result.
>
>
>
> If the Call for Consensus is approved:
>
>
>
> 1. The existing COGA Gap Analysis document will be split into two separate
> note track documents as follows:
>
>
>
> - Gap Analysis
>
> https://w3c.github.io/coga/gap-analysis/
>
>
>
> - A First Public Working Draft (FPWD) of "Making content usable for people
> with cognitive and learning disabilities" will be authorized:
>
> https://w3c.github.io/coga/content-usable/
>
>
>
> 2. Standing permission for COGA to publish updated working drafts will be
> authorized for both documents.
>
>
>
> Please note that there is a 'Design Themes' section in the new document
> which has links to a third document. There is still discussion about the
> name and optimal disposition of that third document. Whether or not it
> eventually becomes an additional note track document is not part of this
> CfC.
>
>
>
> ACTION TO TAKE
>
>
>
> This CfC is now open for objection, comment, as well as statements of
> support via email. Silence will be interpreted as support, though messages
> of support are certainly welcome.
>
>
>
> If you object to this proposed action, or have comments concerning this
> proposal, please respond by replying on list to this message no later than *Midnight
> Boston Time on Tuesday 4th December*.
>
>
>
> IMPORTANT: If you are a member of both AG and APA you should vote on both
> CfCs. AG and APA need to determine whether a consensus exists independently
> of each other.
>
>
>
> Thanking you for your attention on this question,
>
>
>
> Alastair Campbell
>
> AG Co-Chair
>
>
>
> Janina Sajka
>
> APA Chair
>


-- 
*​John Foliot* | Principal Accessibility Strategist | W3C AC Representative
Deque Systems - Accessibility for Good
deque.com