Re: Concerns with Accessibe joining W3C

Hi Karen,

I certainly have thoughts and opinions <grin>, and I've been knocking about
at the W3C for more than a decade, but I'd prefer to defer voicing more of
my opinions here - I believe the questions you raise are valid, and perhaps
Shawn or W3M (W3C Management) should weigh in here.

I am aware of the perception that the W3C is some kind of "police" (IMHO a
completely false assumption), but I also note that it is *my perception*
that in the WAI domain, we seemingly have a larger-than-usual number of
"Invited Experts" and participants who are here for "accessibility" first,
standards second. I don't have an answer to that.

I'm a huge fan standards driving progress, but to be clear, we create
'standards' not 'LAWS', and just because we get a standard published in no
way means that it becomes 'gospel' - in fact there is a (disappointing at
times) history at the W3C of really cool specs that could benefit
accessibility that go nowhere (example: https://www.w3.org/TR/emotionml/).

JF

On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 1:01 PM Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net>
wrote:

> wow, thanks for this John.
> I admit though it generates a question.
> Has anyone ever surveyed what  the general public, or even members believe
> the role of the w3c to be?
> I ask because there are so many environments where the name gets invoked,
> so  many ways rules are used that I imagine there is confusion about the
> things you note here.
> as a reporter, I have come across the w3c described as the Internet police
> more than once.
> Thoughts on image and perception?
> Karen
>
>
>
> On Fri, 28 May 2021, John Foliot wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > +1 to Patrick Lauke. Am I the only one struck by the (it's more than
> just)
> > irony of a group that ostensibly promotes inclusion of all kinds,
> actively
> > discussing excluding a company from W3C participation? (And, a quick
> check
> > at https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Member/List#xA confirms they are indeed
> > members already.)
> >
> > I get it. This company has a well deserved reputation of activity that
> many
> > of us find... troubling. I too have signed Karl's Overlay Factsheet, and
> > I've publicly pointed at this company as being untruthful and snake-oil
> > salesmen (using those exact words). I'm not a fan of their technology
> > "solution" as it adds as much grief as it claims to remove.
> >
> > But it's critical to remember that the W3C is a member-funder,
> > international standards organization - and a consortium that does more
> than
> > just work on standards for digital accessibility. (The member-funded part
> > is critical - it costs $$ to keep the lights on, and that money has to
> come
> > from somewhere.) The W3C has members from around the world, of all forms
> of
> > political stripes and business models, and it's important to note that a
> > LOT of entities join the W3C with little active participation in specific
> > activities. Their reasons for joining the W3C are as varied as the
> members
> > themselves. Additionally, the W3C has absolutely no power to *force*
> member
> > companies to follow or adopt W3C standards (because otherwise, Apple
> would
> > support @longdesc in their tooling stack - for example...) Finally, there
> > are valuable Accessibility advocates (warriors) producing great digital
> > accessibility work today that are NOT members of the W3C for reasons that
> > may or may-not have anything to do with "accessibility" (WebAIM, FUNKA).
> > W3C membership is NOT a badge that separates "us" from "them".
> >
> > The consortium is NOT a members-only country club, it's NOT a
> > by-invitation-only collection of monoculture businesses, advocates, and
> > other stakeholders (EDU, government, etc.), and as disappointing it may
> be
> > to see a company that many of us have serious reservations about actively
> > seeking to participate at the W3C, I for one would fight tooth and nail
> to
> > ensure their right to do so remained in place. It may turn out
> positively,
> > it may turn out negatively, but frankly I'm offended that some would even
> > contemplate actively slamming the door in their face simply because they
> > don't see things the way *we* see them.
> >
> > IMHO, it's the antithesis of inclusion.
> >
> > JF
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 4:52 PM Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi, Karen,
> >>
> >> The Code document includes some of that information directly and links
> to
> >> other:
> >>
> >> * Section 4: Reporting Violations and Supporting the Code
> >>         https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/#Reporting
> >>
> >> * "Procedures" in Positive Work Environment Home Page
> >>         https://www.w3.org/Consortium/pwe/
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> ~Shawn
> >>
> >>
> >> On 27-May-21 3:39 PM, Karen Lewellen wrote:
> >>> I can respect your stance.
> >>> may I ask how the w3c insures anyone complies with this code of ethics?
> >>> By which I mean, is it possible to join, yet engage in the sorts of
> >> behavior illustrated by some posts here,  without  anyone the wiser?
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Karen,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, 27 May 2021, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I actually have concerns about this discussion. I'm sure going over
> the
> >> list of current members https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Member/List each
> of
> >> us can find at least one or two current members that don't, in our view,
> >> fit our view of a good actor - maybe they are in the cryptocurrency
> market,
> >> or maybe they're tied to a media company heavily invested in embedding
> DRM
> >> schemes into standards, or maybe they're tied to a particular government
> >> body that is actively working on the suppression of free speech, or ...
> >>>>
> >>>> However, under the rules, as long as they behave in accordance with
> the
> >> membership agreement, and follow the code of ethics and professional
> >> conduct https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ (and as long as they pay
> >> their membership fees), they are free to join.
> >>>>
> >>>> P
> >>>> --
> >>>> Patrick H. Lauke
> >>>>
> >>>> https: //www.splintered.co.uk/ | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
> >>>> https: //flickr.com/photos/redux/ | https://www.deviantart.com/redux
> >>>> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > *John Foliot* | Senior Industry Specialist, Digital Accessibility
> >
> > "I made this so long because I did not have time to make it shorter." -
> > Pascal "links go places, buttons do things"
> >
>


-- 
*John Foliot* | Senior Industry Specialist, Digital Accessibility

"I made this so long because I did not have time to make it shorter." -
Pascal "links go places, buttons do things"