- From: Chaals Nevile <charles.nevile@consensys.net>
- Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2024 01:37:00 +0000
- To: Lucy Greco <lgreco@berkeley.edu>, Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
- Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Hi Lucy, Yeah, it is a battle to get policies that recognise things that can change. Maybe it will help in the battle if you explicitly set milestones for update - e.g. "When a draft of WCAG is published as a Candidate Recommendation, we will begin a policy refresh. At the later of N months, or when the Candidate Recommendation version is published as a Recommendation, the policy requirement will be to meet the new version". This means - you aren't left a decade behind the best practice we can get consensus on, and gives time to update when there is a new version. - the people who are meant to work on this don't have to change their systems and processes on one day with no warning. - your implementation experience can usefully produce feedback if you're doing a good job and starting to implement the update as a learning process. Candidate Recommendation is a good stage to be looking at how to implement the policy update. The point of choosing "the later of N months or publication of a Recommendation" means that there is a minimum time to adapt, but if the Recommendation isn't finished by then (e.g. because feedback led to further changes and a new Candidate Recommendation) you don't set the policy target as something that is still being changed. Cheers On Monday, February 5, 2024 22:48:10 (+01:00), Lucy Greco wrote: > thanks Shawn > I am hoping our new policy can use this link but its an uphill battel > people want a version number and then do not want to update policy less > then every 15 years so having this link will definitely my argument for > linking and not stating a version number -- Charles 'Chaals' Nevile Lead Standards Architect, ConsenSys Inc
Received on Tuesday, 6 February 2024 01:37:11 UTC