Re: Request to Strengthen the HTML5 Accessibility Design Principle

On Wed, 24 Jun 2009, Laura Carlson wrote:
> > 
> > Is that what you mean by collaboration?
> I mean real debate.

I presume, from your e-mail, that you do not consider this to be debate:

Could you elaborate on why?

> I don't mean argument, or hurling insults or making every effort to look 
> right no matter what the facts may be. I don't mean twisting the facts 
> to suit a viewpoint, or selectively choosing those points in a subject 
> which happen to favor a position, while ignoring the rest.

As far as I can tell, the above e-mail suffers from none of those 

> I mean debate; the honest evaluation of a subject to determine what is 
> real, where both sides of an issue actively and enthusiastically seek 
> out the truth. Yes, the truth...that which is the bottom line, the real 
> deal, what is actually happening and why.

I don't think there is a single "truth" to be found here to be honest; 
it's more of a judgement call. Language design usually is.

What you describe is the ideal that I have been striving for ever since 
the HTML5 effort started several years ago (long before the W3C and WAI 
groups got involved, in fact, though I had been requesting feedback from 
the WAI groups even then). If there is something I can do to help us use 
debate rather than "argument" (as you put it), please let me know. I've 
certainly been trying hard to take into account everyone's input. The spec 
itself has gone through dramatic changes on many topics as I throw out my 
own previous opinions based on feedback. For example, the <datagrid> 
section has gone through dramatic change, and will do so again (Hyatt and 
I are working on a better proposal).

> I'm hoping the HTML and PF working groups can work together and actually 
> debate and collaborate to resolve issues. Perhaps the Chairs have 
> concrete ideas on how this can be facilitated. I know that the PF has a 
> caucus on HTML issues [1]. That might be an option. I don’t know. 
> Other ideas?

It would help me if you could point to where I have failed to use debate 
on accessibility issues. (Sorry to make this personal, but presumably if I 
had not failed to properly debate, at least you and I would agree that the 
spec aligns on a properly-determined "truth", and thus we would not be 
having this conversation. Please do correct me if I'm wrong.)

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

Received on Wednesday, 24 June 2009 09:17:21 UTC