- From: Julie Romanowski <julie@knowbility.org>
- Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2026 10:32:52 -0600
- To: MURATA Makoto <founder@info-a11y.jp>
- Cc: Alastair Campbell <alastair.campbell@thisisgain.com>, WCAG list <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAPYUgWiTkk36dGE5S=+QesjfZgbwMqiuTQYdrJd-xOO2xoai_g@mail.gmail.com>
Thank you for the explanation. On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 10:16 AM MURATA Makoto <founder@info-a11y.jp> wrote: > Since WCAG 2.1, the AG WG has always been against I18N, IMHO. See > > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12pf9GNSbWctUq_5NfDaYCTe1AeZ1oRICfaer-x4JxOQ/edit?gid=1450324770#gid=1450324770 > > Regards, > Makoto > > 2026年2月25日(水) 0:18 Alastair Campbell <alastair.campbell@thisisgain.com>: > >> Hi Julie, >> >> Internationalisation review(s) are a core part of the W3C process (in the horizontal >> review process >> <https://www.w3.org/guide/documentreview/#how-to-get-horizontal-review>), >> which is also called out in our group’s charter >> <https://raw.githack.com/w3c/charter-drafts/agwg-update-2025/2025/ag-wg.html>. >> As a group we have committed to building that in as we work on WCAG3. >> >> We also have several editor’s notes in the draft WCAG 3 draft >> highlighting areas of work for and with internionalization. >> >> The question here is: What should go into the explainer document? >> >> As WCAG 3 is updated to incorporate aspects of internationalisation (e.g. >> implementing the registries), that would be a suitable thing to add. >> However, as we haven’t done that yet, I’m not sure what to add to the >> explainer. >> >> Kind regards, >> >> -Alastair >> >> >> *From: *Julie Romanowski <julie@knowbility.org> >> *Date: *Tuesday, 24 February 2026 at 13:59 >> *To: *MURATA Makoto <founder@info-a11y.jp> >> *Cc: *WCAG list <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> >> *Subject: *Re: CFC - WCAG 3 explainer and requirements >> >> Hi, Makoto. I am interested in hearing more about why you believe >> internationalization should be included. >> >> On Mon, Feb 23, 2026 at 7:44 PM MURATA Makoto <founder@info-a11y.jp> >> wrote: >> >> -1 since internationalization (including the lack of I18N in WCAG 2) is >> not mentioned. Even the draft charter provides much more information about >> I18N. >> >> Regards, >> MURATA Makoto >> >> 2026年2月24日(火) 7:10 Alastair Campbell <alastair.campbell@thisisgain.com>: >> >> Call For Consensus — ends 2nd March 2026 at midday Boston time. >> >> The update is to publish updates to: >> >> - WCAG 3 explainer (https://w3c.github.io/wcag3/explainer/ >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://w3c.github.io/wcag3/explainer/__;!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8YS_BQ!dtF1XfBpH1cZfkKLBYd1KlbtWXkv6eLmjXNkEx988htp2ES_v0woMAss9aNomY2gJgeTjRbVW76u8uo$> >> ), and >> - WCAG 3 Requirements (https://w3c.github.io/wcag3/requirements/ >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://w3c.github.io/wcag3/requirements/__;!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8YS_BQ!dtF1XfBpH1cZfkKLBYd1KlbtWXkv6eLmjXNkEx988htp2ES_v0woMAss9aNomY2gJgeTjRbVoT8JM8U$> >> ) >> >> >> This CFC does not replace the existing CFC for the working draft >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2026JanMar/0079.html__;!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8YS_BQ!dtF1XfBpH1cZfkKLBYd1KlbtWXkv6eLmjXNkEx988htp2ES_v0woMAss9aNomY2gJgeTjRbVOeAwH5o$> >> . >> >> Updates to the explainer bring it in line with the current working draft >> for WCAG 3. >> Explainer diff >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=https:**Awww.w3.org*TR*wcag-3.0-explainer*&doc2=https:**Adeploy-preview-585--wcag3.netlify.app*explainer*__;Ly8vLy8vLy8v!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8YS_BQ!dtF1XfBpH1cZfkKLBYd1KlbtWXkv6eLmjXNkEx988htp2ES_v0woMAss9aNomY2gJgeTjRbVpFTDvX8$> >> >> Updates to the requirements were minimal to fix a broken link. >> Requirements diff >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=https:**Awww.w3.org*TR*wcag-3.0-requirements*&doc2=https:**Adeploy-preview-585--wcag3.netlify.app*requirements*__;Ly8vLy8vLy8v!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8YS_BQ!dtF1XfBpH1cZfkKLBYd1KlbtWXkv6eLmjXNkEx988htp2ES_v0woMAss9aNomY2gJgeTjRbVeDbQZl4$> >> >> To support the CFC please reply to the group with a “+1”. >> >> 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 accept this decision, please reply with a “-1” and explanation >> before the CfC deadline. >> >> Kind regards, >> >> >> AG Chairs >> >> >>
Received on Tuesday, 24 February 2026 16:33:13 UTC