Re: Concerns with Accessibe joining W3C

Again, this is ascribing motives to individuals and making specific  
assertions about what they will do based on those motives. That is not  
reasonable behaviour.

As Patrick pointed out, a vast amount of work done over the 24-year  
existence of WAI was done by private companies, or organisations funded by  
investment money, or individuals looking to be paid by someone.

Investors can choose whatever reason, or combination of reasons, to put  
money into an organisation.

Completely hypothetically (I neither know nor care about the specific  
details of this case), it is entirely possible that the series A money  
came from some organisation whose mission is to improve accessibility, and  
a condition of the funding is participation in W3C and demonstrating an  
improvement in the effectiveness of their work specifically to counter the  
current stream of bad-mouthing that many in the accessibility community  
raise against them, by actually answering the complaints with improvements.

It is quite reasonable to point out things that don't work as advertised,  
or why a certain solution they develop fails to meet a certain  
requirement. It is reasonable in turn to question whether that requirement  
still makes sense. The point is to reach consensus on the answers to such  
questions. We have been doing that in WAI for 20-odd years, and should  
continue.

cheers

Chaals

On Sat, 29 May 2021 01:56:00 +1000, Steve Green  
<steve.green@testpartners.co.uk> wrote:

> Their investors expect the company to maximise the return on their  
> investment and won’t want anything to get in the way of that, >even if  
> it makes the world better.



-- 
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

Received on Saturday, 29 May 2021 06:09:17 UTC