On 3/28/2012 8:56 AM, Steve Faulkner wrote:
Hi Jeff,
this is an example of a bug that was escalated as per the HTML WG
process that went rough the process and was deemed as having consensus
in the working group not because there is consensus, but because
people who may disagree with the change did not participate.
Not sure what to do with this observation. Our specs are always a
consensus of those that participate. If some choose not to participate
then the spec will not reflect their views.
The editor obviously disagreed as he rejected the bug, but did not
enter into any further discussion, his recent remarks on IRC strongly
suggest he thinks its a bad idea.
If the process is designed to standardise HTML then its not working,
as I point out, when the editor disagrees with a change he simply
creates another fork between the specs or to put it another way if the
working group does not accept what the editor has in the spec another
fork is created.
Not sure what to do with this observation, either. The process is for
the Chairs to determine the consensus of the Working Group even if the
editor disagrees. Sounds like that is what is happening. What are the
alternatives? The editor is entitled to his opinion if he disagrees.
And the WG is entitled to their opinion if they disagree with the editor.
In terms of the divergence of the specs, I think it is a success story
that we have maintained alignment as long as we have. And I agree it
would be highly desirable to continue to maintain alignment for HTML 5,
as well as HTML.next. But it is mathematically impossible for us to
freeze a REC level HTML 5 and expect that to be in perfect alignment
with a changing WHAT WG LS.
We appear to have gone from a state where there was active
participation to a state where there is passive denial of the
legitimacy of the process resulting in a consensual non-consensus.
none of which can be described with a straight face as a working process.
regards
stevef
On 28 March 2012 13:39, Jeff Jaffe <j...@w3.org <mailto:j...@w3.org>>
wrote:
Steve,
I apologize, but I don't know what this is.
Is this:
1. fyi, about timelines of issues?
2. An escalation of the Chairs for not dealing with this issue per
the HTML 5 WG process?
3. An observation that the finalized HTML 5 spec as it moves
forward (LC--> CR --> REC) will diverge from a continually updated
WHAT WG Living Standard (with presumably re-syncing as we move to
HTML.next)?
4. Something else?
Thanks.
Jeff
On 3/28/2012 8:19 AM, Steve Faulkner wrote:
I want to clarify one point that I implied by this statement
"I suspect while this change will be applied to the W3C HTML5 but
not to the WHAT WG, resulting in further divergence between the 2
specs and further dilution of standardized authoring advice (in
this case)."
The active involvement of people, such as the editor in the HTML
WG process, does not necessarily result in standardization of
HTML being advanced. If the editor does not agree with a change
to HTML decided by the working group its only applied to the W3C
HTML5 spec [1].
[1]
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/introduction.html#is-this-html5?
regards
Stevef
On 28 March 2012 11:35, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.st...@gmail.com
<mailto:faulkner.st...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Timeline of an issue: this is an example of a re-ocurring
pattern [1]
Over a 5 month period, feedback and input was called for, a
detailed proposal was provided - total silence ensued, after
the process is complete the editor comments on IRC.
I suspect while this change will be applied to the W3C HTML5
but not to the WHAT WG, resulting in further divergence
between the 2 specs and further dilution of standardized
authoring advice (in this case).
Timeline of an issue:
**Bug 14937*
<https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14937>
-Replace poor coding example for figure with multiple images
opened: 2011-11-25 21:20:52 UTC
* editor rejects
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14937#c1
<https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14937#c1%20>2011-12-07
23:01:38 UTC
Status: Rejected
Change Description: no spec change
Rationale: This isn't an antipattern. It is a best
practice. If current ATs
don't make it accessible, then I recommend approaching AT
vendors and
explaining to them that they're not properly exposing
HTML semantics.
* feedback provided on rejection:
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14937#c2
* No further response from editor
* escalated to issue: Issue 190
<https://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/190> 2011-12-08
10:27:42 UTC
* I submit a proposal
<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/notitle_captions>:
January 18th, 2012.
* Chairs Solicit Alternate Proposals or Counter-Proposals
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Jan/0127.html>
Wed, 25 Jan 2012 14:42:45
* NO counter proposals or feedback on proposal
* CfC: Close ISSUE-190 coding-example by Amicable Resolution
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Feb/0463.html>issued
Tue, 28 Feb 2012 13:23:27
As we have received no counter-proposals or alternate
proposals, the
chairs are issuing a call for consensus on the proposal
that we do have.
If no objections are raised to this call by March 7th
2012, we will
direct the editor to make the proposed change. If anybody
would like to
raise an objection during this time, we strongly
encourage them to
accompany their objection with a concrete and complete
change proposal.
* No responses to CFC
* Chairs issue: Working Group Decision:Close ISSUE-190
coding-example by Amicable Resolution
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Mar/0731.html>Mon,
26 Mar 2012
Commenst by editor on IRC: 2012-03-28 (it appears that this
is the first time the editor has looked at the proposal)
1. # <http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20120328#l-15>
[00:16] <Hixie>
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/notitle_captions#Details
2. # <http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20120328#l-16>
[00:16] <Hixie> really?
3. # <http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20120328#l-17>
[00:17] <Hixie> we're actually going to put an example in
the spec _encouraging_ nested figures?
[1]
* Working Group Decision: Close ISSUE-192 title-attribute
by Amicable Resolution
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Mar/0558.html>
/(Tuesday, 20 March)/
* Working Group Decision: Close ISSUE-188:
generic-track-format by Amicable Resolution
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Mar/0557.html>
/(Tuesday, 20 March)/
* Working Group Decision: Close ISSUE-187
validity-stability by Amicable Resolution
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Mar/0556.html>
/(Tuesday, 20 March)/
* Working Group Decision: Close ISSUE-182
footnote-recommendation by Amicable Resolution
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Mar/0555.html>
/(Tuesday, 20 March)/
* Working Group Decision: Close ISSUE-179 av_param by
Amicable Resolution
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Mar/0554.html>
/(Tuesday, 20 March)/
* Working Group Decision: Close ISSUE-170 rel-uri-valid by
Amicable Resolution
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Mar/0553.html>
/(Tuesday, 20 March)/
--
with regards
Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG
www.paciellogroup.com <http://www.paciellogroup.com> |
www.HTML5accessibility.com
<http://www.HTML5accessibility.com> |
www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner
<http://www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner>
HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives -
dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/
<http://dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/>
Web Accessibility Toolbar -
www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
<http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html>
--
with regards
Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG
www.paciellogroup.com <http://www.paciellogroup.com> |
www.HTML5accessibility.com <http://www.HTML5accessibility.com> |
www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner <http://www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner>
HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives -
dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/ <http://dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/>
Web Accessibility Toolbar -
www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
<http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html>
