Re: How will the response from the pfwg on alt be dealt with?

Hi Dan,
I guess some of us a wondering whether what is an unambiguous formal
response from the PF WG in regards to the current HTML5 spec being out of
step with WAI, WCAG 1 & 2 and the PF WG thinking on the alt. i.e. the alt
should be required not optional, is going to be dealt with.

The way it has been defined in the tracker is that it is a vague suggestion
from out of nowhere. I would have though that a formal response from the PF
WG is substantive?


On 15/02/2008, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote:
>
> Laura Carlson wrote:
> > Hi Dan,
> >
> > On 8 Feb 2008, Steven Faulkner wrote:
> >
> >> As the PFWG have provided a response to the question of whether alt
> should
> >> be required or optional in HTML5, what is the process for dealing with
> it
> >> within the HTML working group?
> >
> > On 8 Feb 2008, Dan Connolly wrote:
> >
> >> I'm not sure; if you give me a pointer to the PFWG response, that
> >> will help me figure it out.
> >
> > On 8 Feb 2008,  Steven Faulkner wrote:
> >
> >> thanks Dan
> >> the response was posted to the HTML WG list on the 6th of feb
> > [snip]
> >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Feb/0082.html
> >>
> >> j graham added it to the issue tracker, though from the wording in the
> >> description isn't clear that it is about the PFWG response. It would be
> good
> >> to be able to clarify and add relevant info into the tracker on the
> issue.
> >>
> >> on that topic, who can add issues to the tracker and what are the
> criteria
> >> for addition?
>
> WG participants who have agreed to be in regular ~weekly contact with
> the chairs, typically by attending teleconferences or finding us in the
> #html-wg IRC channel:
>
> Users
>
>     * Dan Connolly has 9 actions
>     * Michael Cooper has 1 actions
>     * Karl Dubost has 0 actions
>     * James Graham has 0 actions
>     * Ian Hickson has 0 actions
>     * Lachlan Hunt has 1 actions
>     * David Hyatt has 0 actions
>     * Charles McCathieNevile has 0 actions
>     * Shawn Medero has 0 actions
>     * Julian Reschke has 0 actions
>     * Gregory Rosmaita has 1 actions
>     * David Singer has 0 actions
>     * Michael(tm) Smith has 1 actions
>     * Maciej Stachowiak has 0 actions
>     * Anne van Kesteren has 1 actions
>     * Chris Wilson has 2 actions
> -- http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/
>
> If you'd like to have write access to the issues list, please
> do join us at an upcoming teleconference and/or find us in IRC.
>
> >
> > Just wanted to follow up on Steve's inquiry.
> >
> > - Has any progress been made on figuring out what process will be used?
>
> I now have a pointer to the pfwg response and it has
> a home in the issues list:
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/31
>
> > - How is an issue moved forward. How is an open issue turned into an
> > action item?
>
> action items are accepted/assigned in teleconference or IRC discussion.
>
> > - How and by whom is it determined when issue resolved?
>
> Substantive issues are resolved by WG decision, which is typically
> done with a survey where all WG participants get a week to respond.
>
> A few issues have been closed by noting that they're not
> substantive; e.g. they're a dup of some other issue, or
> that the issue was raised based on a misunderstanding.
>
> > - Is there a way to clarify that issue 31 is about the PFWG response?
>
> It seems sufficiently clear that the PFWG response is relevant to
> issue 31.
> What more did you have in mind?
>
> > - Who can add issues to the tracker and what are the criteria for
> addition?
>
>
> See above.
>
> > Thanks you.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Laura
>
>
> --
> Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
>
>


-- 
with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG Europe
Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium

www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org
Web Accessibility Toolbar -
http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html