Re: on involvement of PF

Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, 2008-06-16 14:47 +0100:

> Hi henri, in regards to your point about "special treatment"
> 
> this is how mike smith responded to  julian earlier in the irc:
> 
> [14:11] <Julian> for now I'll use it exactly for those cases where I
> feel HTML5 has a collision or  undesirable overlap with an IETF spec.
> Hope this is ok.
>  # [14:12] <MikeSmith> Julian: yeah, that's exactly what we need
>  # [14:12] <MikeSmith> those are the kinds of issues we really must get resolution on
> 
> what i would anticipate is that The PF will only ask for a
> reconsideration of an issue by the HTML WG if it has "a collision or
> undesirable overlap" with the WAI specs.

And trust that any such issue that PF brings to our attention will
be treated as a high-priority issue. The process for such issues
should be for Al or someone he has asked to represent PF formally
to bring the issue to the attention of the active leadership of
the HTML WG and request it be tracked and make it clear that the
request is made on behalf of the PFWG.

Part of the problem is that the waters have been muddied a great
deal by the fact that most of the "problem" issues (42-50) that
got us in this death-spiral of a discussion to begin with had
nothing to do with accessibility at all -- with the exception of
issue 46 and possibly issue 43 (and even those were not submitted
with any mention of them being of concern to PF but instead
"raised on behalf of Robert J. Burns").

  --Mike

-- 
Michael(tm) Smith
http://people.w3.org/mike/
http://sideshowbarker.net/