- From: jake abma <jake.abma@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2021 15:01:22 +0200
- To: Gregg Vanderheiden <gregg@vanderheiden.us>
- Cc: Rachael Bradley-Montgomery <rmontgomery@loc.gov>, "w3c-waI-gl@w3. org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, Silver TF <public-silver@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAMpCG4GDah3GBQyznKEF1aeBms=EuHM78LGUicRQXEwqtddNKQ@mail.gmail.com>
+1 to Gregg Op vr 15 okt. 2021 om 14:51 schreef Gregg Vanderheiden < gregg@vanderheiden.us>: > RE: Levels of Maturity > > I think the idea of level of maturity labels is a great idea > > There are a lot of good bits to it > > But I would change one bit - which I think is critical to process > > > - Once something is in — it is very hard to get it back out > - Getting something back out - can use up a LOT of time and discussion > getting it back out - slowing the group way down and creating bad feelings. > - If a subgroup can put things in without WG review (for expediency) > it is likely to slow down the process down much more later (much more than > any time saved up front) - and again - create bad feelings. > - The only reason to include something early - is to get input on it > because there is a question or sticking point where input is sought. > - *RECOMMENDATION* > 1. *That nothing go into any draft without WG consensus * > 2. *The WG would be less strict about what goes in at lower levels > - allowing things that it thinks might be added (there is some evidence > that it might) even if wording is not worked out. * > 3. *Language attached to such items would be commensurate with > belief that they can make it or the concerns that need to be addressed. > And they should include a request for comment or input to address those. * > - If the subgroup cannot convince the working group to include > something, even the lower level, it shouldn’t be there yet. > - The editor’s, working, and public docs are all communication > instruments of the working group - not any subgroup - so the working group > should know and determine what is in its communications. > > > I had a second thought at the meeting but cannot recall it now. So I will > pass this one on. > > Otherwise I think the basic concept — labeling things with level of > Maturity — is a good one. > > Best > > > gregg > > ——————————— > Professor, University of Maryland, College Park > Director , Trace R&D Center, UMD > > > On Oct 12, 2021, at 2:22 PM, Bradley-Montgomery, Rachael < > rmontgomery@loc.gov> wrote: > > Hello, > > I am adding in the Silver list. When commenting on this proposal, please > respond all this email. > > Kind regards, > > Rachael > > *From: *Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com> > *Date: *Tuesday, October 12, 2021 at 11:51 AM > *To: *"WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> > *Subject: *Process for WCAG 3.0 document updates > *Resent-From: *<w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> > *Resent-Date: *Tuesday, October 12, 2021 at 11:50 AM > > Hi everyone, > > Regarding the presentation I gave on our process & WCAG 3.0 document, that > presentation is here: > > https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1MRuvJ6BcLCPfupvvrwL6GU-KsyWR76Tb/edit#slide=id.p1 > <https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fpresentation%2Fd%2F1MRuvJ6BcLCPfupvvrwL6GU-KsyWR76Tb%2Fedit%23slide%3Did.p1&data=04%7C01%7Cacampbell%40nomensa.com%7C5d9e891b972e4ba6cb4308d98d2101ba%7Cebea4ad6fbbf43bd8449c56e26692c35%7C0%7C0%7C637695995644406401%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=M93cH8vmMLNgQ1FZ9zzFlYbvUiT8IXON%2F2xKyN7nMgM%3D&reserved=0> > > The main point of the proposal is to change the expectation that the > entire document has consensus and is ‘recommendation ready’. > > You could consider the entire current Working Draft (WD) to be > ‘exploratory’, but we have internal (and probably external) confusion about > the intended maturity level of the document. > > The proposal is to apply labels to each section of the documents which > indicate the level of maturity, and have a level of review that each > section needs to get to for that level. > > The official Working Draft would have the more mature content, the Editors > Draft would include everything being worked on. Both would have the labels. > > Meeting time is rather precious at the moment, we wanted to put this > proposal in front of everyone, get some feedback (here) for broader points, > and then have a survey/discussion. > > Kind regards, > > -Alastair > > -- > > > @alastc / www.nomensa.com > > >
Received on Friday, 15 October 2021 13:01:49 UTC