I also have a few comments on the draft APA charter at
https://www.w3.org/2018/03/draft-apa-charter now that I've had a
chance to review it.

I think we should suggest that both:
 * the first toplevel bullet point in the scope section
 * the second bullet point in the success criteria section
be more explicitly open about working with non-W3C groups, since I
think there may be productive opportunities for such interaction,
such as with the WHATWG.

This is also the first time I'm seeing the work on Personalization
Semantics.  I wonder whether it's a good idea for this work to have
its naming such that it's essentially limited to accessibility,
since many of the semantics being defined seem more generally useful
for cases beyond accessibility (e.g., they'd be very helpful for
autofill).  I wonder if they should be more general additions to the
markup languages being extended rather than accessibility-specific
attributes (at least based on what I think the naming is suggesting).

I'm curious what others think about this, particularly the latter


𝄞   L. David Baron                         http://dbaron.org/   𝄂
𝄢   Mozilla                          https://www.mozilla.org/   𝄂
             Before I built a wall I'd ask to know
             What I was walling in or walling out,
             And to whom I was like to give offense.
               - Robert Frost, Mending Wall (1914)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

dev-platform mailing list

Reply via email to