- From: Tim Boland <frederick.boland@nist.gov>
- Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 08:53:10 -0500
- To: www-qa@w3.org
- Cc: frederick.boland@nist.gov
fyi, Tim Boland NIST PS I've also requested from CSSWG chair (cc'd to CSSWG list) for an agenda item on the Jan 11 CSS WG telecon for SpecGL review (no telecons during holiday period).. >X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2 >Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 13:26:36 -0500 >From: Wendy Chisholm <wendy@w3.org> >Reply-To: wendy@w3.org >Organization: W3C >User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913) >X-Accept-Language: en-us, en >To: boland@nist.gov >Cc: michaelc@watchfire.com, Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, > Jenae Andershonis <jenaea@microsoft.com>, > Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@IEEE.org>, Matt May <mcmay@w3.org> >Subject: Re: QAWG SpecGL review by WCAG WG? >X-MailScanner: >X-MailScanner-From: wendy@w3.org > >Hello Tim, > >Thank you for tracking this item. Per an action item from the WAI >Coordination Group, Jenae is reviewing SpecGL for the WCAG WG (with >respect to WCAG 2.0 as well as accessibility issues in general). She and I >plan to discuss her review either the first or second week of January (or >sooner, since she is making good progress) and if we find issues for >discussion with the larger group will suggest discussion on either >Wednesday and/or Thursday telecons. Also, depending on the issues we may >need to coordinate our feedback with the PFWG. Another option that has >been discussed is for WCAG WG to directly send the feedback to the QAWG. >Are you planning to review the SpecGL for the PFWG and/or the AUWG? Have >you already reviewed it with accessibility in mind? If so, then perhaps >you, Jenae, and I can talk the 1st or 2nd week of January and determine >next steps. > >I'm ccing those folks who are related to this issue to ensure that we >coordinate appropriately. > >Best, >--wendy > >boland@nist.gov wrote: > >>I would like to place QAWG SpecGL review on the agendas of either (or both) >>the first WCAG WG Wednesday-Thursday telecons of the new year, since WG >>comments are due back to QAWG by the end of January 2005. What is the >>best way to do this? >>Thanks and best wishes, >>Tim Boland NIST >> >> >> >> >> > > >-- >wendy a chisholm >world wide web consortium >web accessibility initiative >http://www.w3.org/WAI/ >/-- > >
Received on Wednesday, 15 December 2004 13:53:45 UTC