Hi dan, > I have answered your questions to the best of my ability.
I am sure you have. >I can't imagine what more you want. I suppose that is answered by my intervening email. Fully understand if you can't deliver that, but would appreciate guidance on how to go about making it happen. >As I said, this looks like a design issue; there is somewhere >around 2 years of back-log on those in front of the PFWG request. It seems somewhat incongruous that a decision to change something can be made at the editors whim, but there is a 2 year back log to even begin reversing the change. On 15/02/2008, Dan Connolly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Steven Faulkner wrote: > > Hi Dan, > > I guess some of us a wondering whether what is an unambiguous formal > > response from the PF WG in regards to the current HTML5 spec being out > > of step with WAI, WCAG 1 & 2 and the PF WG thinking on the alt. i.e. the > > alt should be required not optional, is going to be dealt with. > > > Yes, I expect it will. > > I have answered your questions to the best of my ability. > I can't imagine what more you want. > > As I said, this looks like a design issue; there is somewhere > around 2 years of back-log on those in front of the PFWG request. > > I expect the WG to get to it in due course. > > I was just on a call with Al Gilman and he didn't bring this up; > I infer that he's satisfied with the rate of progress. > > If the pace isn't satisfactory to you, you're welcome to > (a) come to a teleconference and argue for higher priority > (b) ask Al Gilman to follow up > > > > > > -- > > Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ > > -- with regards Steve Faulkner Technical Director - TPG Europe Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org Web Accessibility Toolbar - http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
