- From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 15:09:12 -0600
- To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
[QAWG -- this is the reference document of the 20030818 telecon resolution for OpsGL progression, trimmed down to just those consensus parts that are relevant to the resolution. -LRH] We have (as of noon EDT, 18 August 2003) apparently only one outstanding negative response to our OpsGL DoC document: Jon Gunderson's rejection (thread starting at [4]) of our disposition of his OpsGL issue, LC-56 [1]. I propose that we (QAWG) move forward as follows. Part 1: Considering only OpsGL: ========== There is only one part of LC-56 [1] which is relevant to WG operations and OpsGL: "This may require having a specific person in charge of defining and monitoring the inclusion of accessibility features." Regardless of the resolution of the broader [QA-WAI] issue, we believe that OpsGL should not require such a specific person. Reasons: 1.) If "defining and monitoring the inclusion of accessibility features" is determined to be OUTSIDE of the scope of QA's mission and responsibilities, then any such "special person" is outside of the scope of OpsGL (QA-related operational aspects of WG life). 2.) If "defining and monitoring the inclusion of accessibility features" is determined to be WITHIN the scope of QA's mission and responsibilities, then the proposed accessibility duties would automatically fall within the job description of the OpsGL-required "QA Moderator". Considering only OpsGL, then, there is no need for any change. We reaffirm our disposition of this comment, and we will progress OpsGL with the outstanding disagreement. [...snip...] Regards, -Lofton. [1] http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/lc-issues#x56 [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2003Aug/0008.html [3] ... [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2003Aug/0016.html
Received on Friday, 22 August 2003 16:53:57 UTC