Yehuda,
I have raised the issue[1][2] you outline with Ian Jacobs, the W3C
Process working group and others at W3C,
It's my particular concern and thesis that authors and end-users,
including those requiring alternative affordance
are not well represented on W3C working groups.
Why is there no W3C UA Games technology or WG?
regards
Jonathan Chetwynd
Honte.eu
Jonathan Chetwynd
j.chetw...@btinternet.com
http://www.openicon.org/
+44 (0) 20 7978 1764
[1] On 24 Sep 2009, at 20:00, Yehuda Katz wrote:
I'll think about it. I was mostly hoping to start a discussion about
alternatives. I think the bottom line here is that while the spec is
well-optimized for implementors, it is not very well optimized for
consumers. I suppose it would be possible to say that this stuff is
*only* for implementors. I'd prefer if it were also readable for
those trying to use the specification.
-- Yehuda
[2] There are for instance a very large number of published comments
raising similar concerns, regarding the technical language of WCAG2
- WAI, W3C.
