- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 03:37:55 -0500 (EST)
- To: Harry Woodrow <harrry@email.com>
- cc: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Hi folks, as a member of the WCAG group and someone who reads this list relatively carefully (both in my own time, as it happens) I do try to ensure that information goes between the two. As far as I know there is nobody who has a formal responsibility to do this, and in particular the only accountability is trust and being able to check. So if you have a point that you are not certain has been clearly understood and accepted, and carried to another group, it is probably valuable to check. Further, I agree with Harry that what happens in the WCAG, a technical group, is indeed something most accessible to people with technical expertise. But I think Kynn is right that the WCAG group is relatively accessible to "ordinary people" including ordinary people with disabilities - at least by comparison to most W3C technical working groups. cheers Charles On Fri, 28 Dec 2001, Harry Woodrow wrote: Thank you for your opinion that the WCAG is as open to people with disabilities as this group. This may be so, and the W3c 's attempt to make it so is commendiblehowever there are except a couple of signifigent difernces. Non members of the WCAG can read archives but not directly post. Membership requires a commitment to attend meetings or phone conferences. Membership is not to be taken as a learning experience. True people with disabilitie are free to join ( subject to the chairs consent) if they can fullfill the requirements. Many people with disabilities and their organisations can not comply with those conditions partially because of the costs involved. A full time web developer may be able to afford these, after all the costs are probably largely a tax deduction anyway but people who for various reasons often associated with their disabilities. There are other reasons for not participating. The group itself and the technical nature of the deliverables is such that the content is more relevent to technical experts. On the other hand this group is aimed at a more diverse audience who may not be able to comply with the WCAG membership requirements or who feel that they could not benifit the WCAG enough. It would seem to me that the opinions of this group should be of value and by posting to this list it would be hoped that those members of the WCAG who also subscribe to this list could be a conduit to that group for the ideas of people such as those who may not have your unargued technical skills but know through everyday experience the effect that decisions such as those made by the WACG have on them. It is easy to stand back and say: "Well if there is no bread let them eat cake, but if the means to afford the cake are not there it doesnt help. Harry WOodrow -----Original Message----- From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Kynn Bartlett Sent: Thursday, 27 December 2001 2:16 PM To: Harry Woodrow; Charles McCathieNevile Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org Subject: RE: Fresh start? Re: Minimal Browser Capabilities At 12:16 PM +0800 12/27/01, Harry Woodrow wrote: >How many disabled users are there on the WCAG, I think you will find that >there are probably more people with disabilities and disability >organizations and developers with disabilities on this group than on the >WCAG. If we are talking about making the web available for people with >disabilities isn't it important we give them a voice...and listen to them. WCAG working group has very low entry requirements; near as I can figure -- and I'm not speaking for the group now -- you have to state a willingness to participate and show rudimentary knowledge of the material, and you're welcome to join. The archives are public and anyone who has a comment on developing drafts or working group discussions can speak up, even without commiting to join the group. So I definitely think the voice is there -- although I tend to think less in terms of "we" giving "them" a voice and more about "all of us", which may explain why I haven't done any head counts on who is or isn't disabled in the group. If anyone feels denied a voice in WCAG working group, please feel free to read up on the time and participation requirements, and consider joining the group if you feel qualified, or at the very least giving your feedback on open issues. (This is not an official call for participation; this is Kynn pointing out that the means to be heard already exists.) --Kynn -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com> http://kynn.com Chief Technologist, Idyll Mountain http://idyllmtn.com Web Accessibility Expert-for-hire http://kynn.com/resume January Web Accessibility eCourse http://kynn.com/+d201 -- Charles McCathieNevile http://www.w3.org/People/Charles phone: +61 409 134 136 W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI fax: +1 617 258 5999 Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia (or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France)
Received on Monday, 31 December 2001 03:38:00 UTC