Re: CFC - Focus for Working Group

Getting group consensus on requirements and a project plan require time on the part of the Working Group broadly. Many people have expressed a desire to be more involved with Silver but also be involved with WCAG 2.2 and it isn’t as simple as telling these members to just join the Silver call as many people can’t commit to the WG calls, LVTF/COGA/MATF calls, and Silver TF calls.

I feel that getting approval on Silver requirements will happen faster if the work of the TF begins to deliberately integrate with the main WG in order to find that consensus, and that this takes WG time. If the WG doesn’t commit time to this soon then it will still require time to bring the WG as a whole up to speed, and this will delay full approval. In addition, as we approach the rechartering process the Working Group also needs to have a clear sense of where Silver is in a 3 year charter, and for that it is important that we develop a shared understanding. This doesn’t mean that the Task Force won’t be able to continue to operate, just that we want the main WG to step up in providing more regular input into Silver plans and work.


Andrew Kirkpatrick
Head of Accessibility

From: Shawn Lauriat <>
Date: Thursday, February 21, 2019 at 11:00 AM
To: Detlev Fischer <>
Cc: WCAG <>
Subject: Re: CFC - Focus for Working Group
Resent-From: WCAG <>
Resent-Date: Thursday, February 21, 2019 at 10:59 AM

To clarify: I would vote +1 if we had consensus on requirements and a project plan of some sort in place. We have the work for more, but we need clear agreement on what we'll work on and how we'll work on it. A more easing transition would probably work better so we can focus on structure and process before all-hands-on-deck writing kicks off, but I've only really just entered this conversation and don't need to derail this thread, since Jeanne and I didn't take part in the conversations leading up to this call for consensus (I just happened to see it go by in my email).

As such, for now: -1.


On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 10:36 AM Detlev Fischer <<>> wrote:
in the light of Shawn's comment, which I understand to express that the Silver TF thinks it needs more time before so much if the WG focus should be on Silver. It then seems sensible to focus more on WCAG 2.2 and the Techniques and wait for Silver to come and indicate when they want more involvement, beyond updating the WG regularly (happy to turn this into  +1 if I misunderstood).
Am 19.02.2019 um 21:32 schrieb Andrew Kirkpatrick:
Call For Consensus — ends Friday February 22nd at 3:30pm Boston time.

The Working Group has discussed how to focus the efforts of the group over the next 12-24 months and the proposal is that the WG can address the short-term need for improvements to Techniques and Understanding and begin to ramp-up work within the Working Group on Silver as well as commit to a WCAG 2.2, which will avoid the possibility of a large gap in time between the June 2018 WCAG 2.1 and Silver reaching Rec.

Proposed Schedule
March 2019-April 2019: 45% Techniques and Understanding, 45% Silver, 10% WCAG 2.2 (most drafting of new SC in ad hoc groups or TFs)
May 2019-forward: 45% WCAG 2.2, 45% Silver, 10% Techniques and Understanding maintenance


Call minutes:

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 decision, please let the group know before the CfC deadline.


Andrew Kirkpatrick
Head of Accessibility


Detlev Fischer


Werderstr. 34, 20144 Hamburg

Mobil +49 (0)157 57 57 57 45

Beratung, Tests und Schulungen für barrierefreie Websites

Received on Thursday, 21 February 2019 18:45:31 UTC