- From: Léonie Watson <lwatson@tetralogical.com>
- Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2023 17:03:54 +0100
- To: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, "WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
There is also no easy way for the reactions on a particular comment to be frozen,meaning someone could remove or change their reaction after the CFC was declared. Other WG accept this risk on the basis that few CFC are particularly controversial and/or are rarely decided on the substance of one or two reactions, but I don't think that would work for this WG. On 27/04/2023 4:31 PM, Patrick H. Lauke wrote: > Worth noting here that the voting / CFC is aimed only at WG members on > the GL list. Putting it on GitHub would likely lead to "randoms" > voting as well, which then would require deduping/verifying votes? > > P > -- > Patrick H. Lauke > > https://www.splintered.co.uk/ / https://github.com/patrickhlauke / > https://codepen.io/patrickhlauke > https://flickr.com/photos/redux/ / https://www.deviantart.com/redux > https://mastodon.social/@patrick_h_lauke > > > ------ Original Message ------ > From "Mike Gifford" <mike.gifford@civicactions.com> > To "WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>; "Andrew > Kirkpatrick" <akirkpat@adobe.com> > Date 27/04/2023 16:00:03 > Subject Re: Understanding dismay > >> Thanks for asking Andrew, >> >> I’m sure this has been brought up before, but I’m not part of any >> other group that does this. I’m part of lots of other groups. >> >> Normally in tech projects people go to GitHub & give a Thumbs-Up if a >> vote is needed. That becomes the default voting mechanism for many >> projects. >> >> I could see the W3C setting up a simple link that allows logged in >> users to record a yes/no on a particular decision. >> >> I know that there are folks that don’t like GitHub. Like any tool, it >> isn’t perfect. I know setting up online voting systems can be >> expensive and can carry their own set of challenges. >> >> But there is a lot of email discussions that take place on this list. >> It clutters up a lot of folks inboxes. Adds to our cognitive load. >> Sure, it is a lowest-common-denominator solution that works. However, >> how many people does it drive away from the W3C? How many folks just >> filter the emails, and become disengaged from the conversation. >> >> I don’t know the answers to this. Maybe a hybrid option could work. >> Pushing most conversations and discussions to GitHub, where many of >> us would find it more useful, but allowing some folks to have some >> conversations in the mailing list because that is their preference. >> It is all a bit awkward. >> >> I figured that because I’m new I should ask this before I too become >> accustomed to a pattern (that seems broken). >> >> Mike >> >> >> Mike Gifford, Senior Strategist, CivicActions >> Drupal Core Accessibility Maintainer >> https://civicactions.com <https://civicactions.com/> | >> https://accessibility.civicactions.com >> http://twitter.com/mgifford | http://linkedin.com/in/mgifford >> >> On April 27, 2023 at 9:16:14 AM, Andrew Kirkpatrick >> (akirkpat@adobe.com) wrote: >> >>> Mike, >>> >>> Can you explain why this process is dismaying? >>> >>> >>> >>> FYI, we changed to using the CFC process which includes an extended >>> period of time for respondents around the world to have time to >>> respond to decisions without attending a call that may be at 2am for >>> them. All of the CFC responses are recorded in the W3C’s system for >>> a permanent record. >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> AWK >>> >>> >>> >>> Andrew Kirkpatrick >>> >>> Director, Accessibility >>> >>> Adobe >>> >>> >>> >>> akirkpat@adobe.com >>> >>> http://twitter.com/awkawk >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Mike Gifford <mike.gifford@civicactions.com> >>> Date: Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:43 AM >>> To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> >>> Subject: Re: CFC Move WCAG 2.2 to Candidate Recommendation >>> Resent-From: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> >>> Resent-Date: Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:42 AM >>> >>> >>> >>> EXTERNAL: Use caution when clicking on links or opening attachments. >>> >>> >>> >>> +1 Thanks. >>> >>> Also, a bit dismayed that we're voting via email. >>> >>> Mike >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 7:17 AM Bradley Montgomery, Rachael L >>> <rmontgomery@loc.gov> wrote: >>> >>>> +1 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com> >>>> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 7:14 PM >>>> To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> >>>> Subject: CFC Move WCAG 2.2 to Candidate Recommendation >>>> Resent-From: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> >>>> Resent-Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 7:12 PM >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> CAUTION: This email message has been received from an external >>>> source. Please use caution when opening attachments, or clicking on >>>> links. >>>> >>>> Hi everyone, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Call For Consensus — ends Tuesday 2nd April at 5pm Boston time. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The Working Group has agreed (in meetings) to re-start the >>>> Candidate Recommendation stage for WCAG 2.2. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> This CFC is to approve that transition into CR, including the >>>> changes made since the last one. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> There are updates to Target Size and Focus Appearance, which can be >>>> viewed here: >>>> >>>> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3123/files >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> These two SCs will be marked ‘at risk’, with a fallback to the >>>> previous versions. If that fall back is also not agreed, then it >>>> would result in removal. (For Focus Appearance, the fallback would >>>> be the previous text at AAA level.) >>>> The fallbacks for ‘at risk’ are subject to approval from W3C >>>> management, we would return to the group if it is not approved. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Minor changes since the last CR: >>>> >>>> A non-normative change to Focus Not Obscured (adjusting the notes) >>>> was agreed: https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3083/files >>>> Accessibility Authentication had “(minimum)” added to the name: >>>> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3132/files >>>> >>>> >>>> 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. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -Alastair >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> @alastc / www.nomensa.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> >>> Mike Gifford, Senior Strategist, CivicActions >>> >>> Drupal Core Accessibility Maintainer >>> >>> https://civicactions.com <https://civicactions.com/> | >>> https://accessibility.civicactions.com >>> <https://accessibility.civicactions.com/> >>> >>> http://twitter.com/mgifford | http://linkedin.com/in/mgifford >>> > -- Léonie Watson (she/her) Director https://tetralogical.com
Received on Thursday, 27 April 2023 16:04:04 UTC