Re: New Telcon Time: Vote!

aloha, doug!

thank you for setting up a WBS version of the survey...

as for the rest of your comments, all i will say is that i'm not 
interested in catching flies -- i'm interested in SVG, and would like 
very much to participate in the SVGIG, not having the time -- nor the 
tools or expertise -- necessary to partake in the deliberations of the 
SVG WG itself...  the SVGIG is a public forum that seeks to create an 
environment where SVG is widely, appropriately, and accessibly used, so 
i fail to understand why i should be castigated (pilloried, doug? 
really?), for pointing but that your original instructions on how to 
use the survey tool, both in the announcement and on the tool itself, 
make very little sense outside of a visual, point and click (or in the 
case of paint, i suppose, "select by dragging") context...  nor does it 
help that information -- such as UTC equivalencies -- is contained in 
mouseOver onHover events, but i didn't email you -- nor try to hook you 
up with people who are more than willing to work with you for the common 
good by circulating my reply to your announcement to a related public 
forum -- just to get into a pissing contest with you over the ideal being 
the enemy of the practical...  there is nothing outrageous or duplicitous 
about my emessages or by my attempt to broaden the conversation; it was 
not done with intent to "embarrass" or "shame you" -- and please note 
that not all that appears between quotation marks is a quotation, and 
that those i just employed are emphatic quotes, just as the "air-quotes" 
around the words "below the belt" and "unfair" were intended as emphasis, 
it being my habit to usually mark a quote explicitly with the word quote, 
because one can never take any capacity on the part of an end user for 
granted, and no where is that more so than in the case of assistive 
technology and alternate renderings -- capitalization and indications of 
quotes are 2 of the very very few things one can usually depend upon 
being successfully expressed in an aural or tactile, as well as a visual, 
environment -- there isn't any indicator for bold or emphasis or italics 
in braille codes, and in many, the idea of wasting space indicating a 
single capital letter, let alone an entire word or term, is considered 
incomprehensible...

besides, doug, as i know i've told you before, there's no point in 
getting into a pissing contest with a blind man -- you'll just get soaked 
and you'll both end looking the fool...  gregory.
   ----------------------------------------------------------------
   "Most Fools think they are only ignorant."
                   Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanack, 1748
   ----------------------------------------------------------------
   Gregory J. Rosmaita, oedipus@hicom.net
           Camera Obscura: http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/index.html
   ----------------------------------------------------------------

---------- Original Message -----------
From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
To: "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <oedipus@hicom.net>, SVG IG List <public-svg-
ig@w3.org>
Sent: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 22:12:12 -0500
Subject: Re: New Telcon Time: Vote!

> Hi, Gregory-
> 
> Gregory J. Rosmaita wrote (on 3/6/09 4:30 PM):
> > 
> > thanks not only for your quick response, but for taking my criticism
> > in the vein it was intended -- not as a cri de coeur, 
> > but constructively...
> 
> Actually, the majority of your email did not strike me as 
> constructive, and your subsequent emails even less so.  As I 
> said before, simply pointing out that the planning tool was not 
> accessible would have sufficed.
> 
> In fact, as I said before, I expected that the data table 
> *would* be accessible.  It is properly marked up with headers, 
> and a screen reader should be able to interpret it.  Admittedly, 
> the mouseover interaction probably needed a focus-based 
> equivalent.  The fact that I referred to it as "visual output" 
> doesn't change the fact that colors were used only as 
> supplementary (non-crucial) information to the contents of the table
> cells.
> 
> Accessibility is not so much a technical or legal challenge as 
> it is a social one.  Escalating the issue, CCing other lists and 
> other people not in the SVG IG and not affected by the 
> experimental telcon tracking tool I pointed to, does not seem 
> productive nor polite, and doesn't promote an environment of 
> working in good faith or with mutual respect. You catch more 
> flies with honey than with vinegar.
> 
> Note that the telcon planning tool was not a resource on the W3C 
> site
> (nor even made by a W3C Team member), and that it wasn't 
> intended for widespread deployment in its current state.  It's 
> something Cameron put together because we found the equivalent 
> W3C tool is too difficult to use, and something that I thought 
> I'd use so that I could accomplish a short-term task.  I'd 
> planned on making some improvements with the aim of making it 
> suitable for general use, and certainly making it accessible 
> should have been on that list, but honestly, being put on this 
> pillory somehow takes the wind out of my sails.
> 
> Unfortunately, after spending a few hours researching the matter,
>  I am no closer to solving why this table isn't accessible.  The 
> markup is good, and follows the guidelines I've read in various 
> places about how to make tables accessible.  I could update the 
> script with functionality I described, but deciding on a new 
> telcon times for the SVG IG is only one of approximately a 
> couple hundred tasks I have that need immediate attention, so 
> instead, I have put together a canonical WBS poll, in the 
> expectation that it is already tested and is known to be 
> accessible, if not ideal.
> 
> Therefore, members of the SVG IG can choose between using the 
> tool I pointed to before, or answering the following WBS poll: 
> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/42368/svgig-telcon-2009q1/
> 
> I will still use the planning tool to collate the results.
> 
> Maybe at some point I will have time to fix the planning tool, 
> and if so, I will make it accessible... not because I'm 
> obligated to by W3C, nor for legal reasons, nor because you rose 
> a big stink about it (in fact, in spite of that), but because 
> it's the right thing to do.
> 
> > PS: what IS the device independent equivalent of "paint"?
> 
> I was using the term metaphorically, to mean roughly "tag with 
> the selected value".  I didn't mean it as a technical term, and 
> I don't know of a more precise way of phrasing it.
> 
> Gregory J. Rosmaita wrote (on 3/6/09 5:19 PM):
> > doug wrote:
> >> But you didn't need to pull out the umbrageous WCAG 2.0 stick to 
> >> beat me with...  simply pointing out that it wasn't accessible 
> >> would have sufficed.
> > 
> > i'm not sure i understand why citing WCAG 2.0 is "unfair" or "hitting
> > below the belt"
> 
> Please don't put words in my mouth, especially out of context, CCing
> people that weren't in on the original conversation.  I didn't 
> say either of those things, and putting them in quotes makes it 
> look like I did.
> 
> -Doug
------- End of Original Message -------

Received on Saturday, 7 March 2009 05:23:48 UTC