Re: Notes re a roadmap to reaching consensus

Hi Rachael

Thanks for the notes. 

Not sure what you mean by a change indirection.   Did you mean a change indirection to the process of getting to consensus?

Other than my one suggestion about a straw poll on topics I think we might all agree on — or feel was close enough to agree —  I didn’t think I suggested any process.  Just thoughts and reflections of ideas I have heard over the years.

I was just throwing things into the ring for people to think about.     

Happy to get together to discuss if you like. 

Best

Gregg



> On Sep 19, 2022, at 4:18 PM, Bradley-Montgomery, Rachael <rmontgomery@loc.gov> wrote:
> 
> Hello Gregg,
>  
> We appreciate that this must have taken a great deal of time to put together.  Unfortunately, we did not receive this in time to incorporate it into our TPAC planning.  As you note, it also does not account for what we worked on at TPAC. The chairs would like to continue building on the group’s work that was begun last week.
>  
> I have put together a Summary of the conversations and decisions at TPAC <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WcOWm75D5ocd6gUhfsnSz-XK7lcNKW4EnOiHADTq-fI/edit>. 
>  
> Please review the TPAC summary.  If you remain a proponent of your suggestions for changing direction after reading the summary, we would like to set up a meeting with you and discuss this in greater detail. 
>  
> We would like to do so before bringing any major shifts in direction to the larger working group.
>  
> Kind regards,
>  
> Rachael
>  
> From: Gregg Vanderheiden RTF <gregg@raisingthefloor.org <mailto:gregg@raisingthefloor.org>>
> Date: Monday, September 19, 2022 at 1:34 PM
> To: GLWAI Guidelines WG org <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org <mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
> Subject: Notes re a roadmap to reaching consensus
> Resent-From: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org <mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
> Resent-Date: Monday, September 19, 2022 at 1:32 PM
>  
> Hi all
>  
> I wrote this before TPAC but was asked by the Chairs to hold off - since they had an orderly way mapped out to discuss topics at the TPAC.   Which sounded wise - so I held back.
>  
> Unfortunately I was unable to attend TPAC - so I am not privy to what went on there - but from the notes and powerpoint it looks like a lot of good ideas.
>  
> I am sending this on — NOT as an alternative to what was done there (I don’t know it all) and I look forward to revising my thinking based on reports from there and our further discussions.  But I think the attached thoughts are helpful to throw into the pot as we discuss WCAG 3.x going forward. 
>  
> So here there are. 
>  
> As I note in my sign off of the document - I submit this with some trepidation.  But it will be good to discuss these.   And I REALLY think it would be good to have the stay poll I suggest to see if where we are and are not in agreement.  I often think that - if I listen carefully - people agree on a lot more than they think they do - and preaching to the choir on what needs to be done - when the problem is just that we can’t figure out HOW to do it with all the goals and constraints we have and trying to find something that solves both. 
>  
> Best
>  
> Gregg