Re: CFC - WCAG2ICT Work Statement

Thank you Mary Jo. In that case, +1

Op vr 21 okt. 2022 17:35 schreef Mary Jo Mueller <maryjom@us.ibm.com>:

> Hi Wilco,
>
>
>
> We did have discussions on this, but the discussion didn’t get captured in
> the meeting minutes. Perhaps because the discussion was pretty brief. My
> recollections from the conversation (those in the Task Force who have a
> different recollection, please chime in):
>
>    - The group didn’t want to initially commit to the extra time to
>    shepherd it into a W3C Statement.
>    - We want to focus on getting the content in there, and potentially on
>    a second round of updates (Phase 2) before potentially pursuing a W3C
>    statement.
>
>
>
> I believe Michael Cooper said that this wasn’t the type of document that a
> W3C Statement was meant to be used for. Michael, correct me if I
> characterized that incorrectly.
>
>
>
> If it can eventually be a W3C statement, we can revisit at a later date.
> The contents of the work statement doesn’t necessarily preclude that from
> happening, IMO. It has to be an updated Note first.
>
>
>
> Mary Jo Mueller
>
> IBM Accessibility Standards
>
>
>
> *From: *Wilco Fiers <wilco.fiers@deque.com>
> *Date: *Friday, October 21, 2022 at 6:42 AM
> *To: *Bradley-Montgomery, Rachael <rmontgomery@loc.gov>
> *Cc: *WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> *Subject: *[EXTERNAL] Re: CFC - WCAG2ICT Work Statement
>
> Hey folks, I wanted to ask if the group considered having WCAG2ICT become
> a W3C Statement (https: //www. w3. org/2021/Process-20211102/#statement),
> rather than a Group Note. W3C Statements weren't a thing when WCAG2ICT was
> initially developed,
>
> ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
>
> *This Message Is From an External Sender *
>
> This message came from outside your organization.
>
> ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd
>
> Hey folks,
>
> I wanted to ask if the group considered having WCAG2ICT become a W3C
> Statement (https://www.w3.org/2021/Process-20211102/#statement), rather
> than a Group Note. W3C Statements weren't a thing when WCAG2ICT was
> initially developed, but it is now. It would give more weight to the
> document if it had the full endorsement of the W3C, rather than it merely
> being a working group decision.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 1:56 AM Bradley-Montgomery, Rachael <
> rmontgomery@loc.gov> wrote:
>
> Call For Consensus — ends Wednesday October 26th at midnight Boston time.
>
>
>
> The WCAG2ICT Task Force and Accessibility Guidelines Working Group has
> come to consensus on the WCAG2ICT Work Statement. You can review the works
> statement at  WCAG2ICT Draft Work Statement
> <https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/wcag2ict/work-statement>
>
>
>
> 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.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Wilco Fiers*
>
> Axe-core & Axe-linter product owner - WCAG 3 Project Manager - Facilitator
> ACT Task Force
>
>
>