Re: [EXT] Re[2]: Understanding dismay

When I joined AGWG I was surprised by the email voting. It seemed so antiquated compared to the developer environments I was used to.

After collaborating with some of our colleagues I grew to appreciate how Github isn’t accessible (in all forms of that word) for many.

The email voting gets the job done and allows the diverse perspectives to participate.

Setting a filter or a label gave my inbox some relief.


From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
Date: Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 11:32 AM
To: WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org) <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: [EXT] Re[2]: Understanding dismay
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<http://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

>>