Re: PROPOSAL: Procedure to Promote Progress With Accessibility Issues in HTML5

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009, David Poehlman wrote:
> I do not see this response as coverage for moving forward with it.  
> What am I missing?  I see/hear your issues, but this is not the thread 
> in which the vent them as I understand the process?

I'm not trying to vent issues; I'm trying to indicate that as far as I can 
tell, the process described is the one that is being followed, at least by 
me, and I am thus trying to understand how I can make things better.

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009, Steven Faulkner wrote:
> ian wrote:
> >I am still hopeful that the WAI will clearly identify
> >accessibility functional requirements and provide rationale. Is there any
> >chance the WAI could provide an ETA for such advice on this topic?
> this email answers your question as to what is going on and ETA


If there is anything I could do to make it easier for you to proceed along 
a more rapid course, please let me know. As you are aware, <canvas> is 
being more widely implemented now and so the quicker we can provide these 
APIs, the quicker the state of the Web will improve. Also, if I can 
encourage you to work with browser vendors in the design of the solution 
you design, that would definitely help shorten the time from after you 
send your proposal to when we can see your proposal deployed, since it 
would mean I wouldn't have to go and try to get their support after the 
fact (which is often harder).

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009, Laura Carlson wrote:
> > Laura, in the interests of the collaboration you espouse, could you 
> > reply to the e-mail I wrote to you last month?
> Taking sides and placing blame will not help collaboration.

The e-mail in question: not about taking sides; it is merely a question from me about what I 
can do to improve communication with the WAI. If I do not know what I am 
doing wrong, it is hard to improve. You have several times now suggested 
principles that we should follow, but as far as I can tell we are 
following them all already -- so if we are not, it would be helpful to 
know what it is we are not doing.

> [snip other initiatives].
> These are all very good, Ian. I appreciate your recent efforts.

You unfortunately skipped past some of my questions. They were not 
rhetorical; answers to these questions really would concretely help move 
this forward.


Can we get a commitment from members of the WAI to approach issues on the 
basis of the shared goal of making HTML 5 the best solution for everyone, 
including people with disabilities and people without disabilities? 

Can the WAI commit to approaching accessibility issues holistically, 
instead of following one-solution agendas as I was recently informed is 
explicitly being done with the summary="" issue?

Could the WAI respond to my e-mails, such as these?:

> The table headers issue is the only progress that happened with the 
> accessibility issues in the past two years. That took people from PF and 
> the HTML WG actually talking, truly debating, and collaborating at a 
> face-to-face meeting.

If we're not debating now, could you point out how we're not doing so? As 
far as I can tell, there is no difference between what we're doing now and 
what we did during the table headers issue discussion.

Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Sunday, 19 July 2009 21:15:20 UTC