example: the HTML WG process is not working

Timeline of an issue: this is an example of a re-ocurring pattern [1]
Over a  5 month period, feedback and input was called for, a detailed
proposal was provided - total silence ensued, after the process is complete
the editor comments on IRC.
I suspect while this change will be applied to the W3C HTML5 but not to the
WHAT WG, resulting in further divergence between the 2 specs and further
dilution of standardized authoring advice (in this case).

Timeline of an issue:

** Bug 14937* <https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14937> - Replace
poor coding example for figure with multiple images opened: 2011-11-25
21:20:52 UTC

* editor rejects https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14937#c1
23:01:38 UTC

Status: Rejected
Change Description: no spec change
Rationale: This isn't an antipattern. It is a best practice. If current ATs
don't make it accessible, then I recommend approaching AT vendors and
explaining to them that they're not properly exposing HTML semantics.

* feedback provided on rejection:

* No further response from editor

* escalated to issue: Issue
190<https://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/190> 2011-12-08
10:27:42 UTC

* I submit a proposal<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/notitle_captions>
:  January 18th, 2012.

* Chairs Solicit Alternate Proposals or
25 Jan 2012 14:42:45

* NO counter proposals or feedback on  proposal

* CfC: Close ISSUE-190 coding-example by Amicable Resolution
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Feb/0463.html>issued Tue,
28 Feb 2012 13:23:27

As we have received no counter-proposals or alternate proposals, the
chairs are issuing a call for consensus on the proposal that we do have.

If no objections are raised to this call by March 7th 2012, we will
direct the editor to make the proposed change. If anybody would like to
raise an objection during this time, we strongly encourage them to
accompany their objection with a concrete and complete change proposal.

* No responses to CFC

* Chairs issue: Working Group Decision: Close ISSUE-190 coding-example by
Amicable Resolution
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Mar/0731.html>Mon, 26
Mar 2012

Commenst by editor on IRC: 2012-03-28 (it appears that this is the first
time the editor has looked at the proposal)

   1. # <http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20120328#l-15> [00:16]
   2. # <http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20120328#l-16> [00:16]
   <Hixie> really?
   3. # <http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20120328#l-17> [00:17]
   <Hixie> we're actually going to put an example in the spec _encouraging_
   nested figures?


   - Working Group Decision: Close ISSUE-192 title-attribute by Amicable
    *(Tuesday, 20 March)*
   - Working Group Decision: Close ISSUE-188: generic-track-format by
   Amicable Resolution<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Mar/0557.html>
    *(Tuesday, 20 March)*
   - Working Group Decision: Close ISSUE-187 validity-stability by Amicable
    *(Tuesday, 20 March)*
   - Working Group Decision: Close ISSUE-182 footnote-recommendation by
   Amicable Resolution<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Mar/0555.html>
    *(Tuesday, 20 March)*
   - Working Group Decision: Close ISSUE-179 av_param by Amicable
    *(Tuesday, 20 March)*
   - Working Group Decision: Close ISSUE-170 rel-uri-valid by Amicable
    *(Tuesday, 20 March)*

with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG

www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com |
HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives -
Web Accessibility Toolbar - www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html

Received on Wednesday, 28 March 2012 10:36:14 UTC