Thread Subject: Re: Grouping ofthecurrent 28software/web standards

Return to this mailing list's archives

From: Barrett, Don
Date: Wed, Oct 11 2006 4:05 PM
Subject: Re: Grouping ofthecurrent 28software/web standards

Can you recommend anything specific we should look at first in [2]? It
is pretty extensive and I haven't seen it before; don't want to waste my
time with dead ends if others have mined it already; any recommendations
welcome. Thanks.


-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Andi
Snow-Weaver
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 4:33 PM
To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] Grouping of thecurrent 28software/web
standards

Don Barrett wrote:

>Please let's not get caught up in the intellectual machinations of how
>to
break the 28 standards into groups. The major purpose for doing this is
only manageability in discussion; we are not forming new categories as I
understand things. Whether we use Peter's, Richard's, Jim's,
Jonathan's, doesn't matter so much as just picking some artificial
scheme and using it to make our task manageable.

Am I missing something?

<end of Don's comments>

Don,

You are correct. The purpose of the grouping is simply to facilitate our
discussion of the existing provisions. I propose that we group them for
our discussion as Jim Thatcher last suggested [1].

To answer Jim's question about a list of standards, the JTC-1 Special
Working Group on Accessibility has just completed an inventory of
standards
- both accessibility standards and standards that probably should
include accessibility provisions. It is a spreadsheet and is quite
extensive. You can download it at [2].

I would ask you all to hold off on getting into detailed discussions on
the provisions for a few more days. Before this list was available, I
was communicating with some early subcommittee members via a
distribution list.
I have urged them all to subscribe to this list as I will stop using the
distribution list as of Monday, October 16th. So I would like to wait
until next week before we get into any more technical discussions to
give them all a chance to subscribe.

[1] http://teitac.org/mailarchives/mail_message.php?id=108&listid=3
[2] http://www.jtc1access.org/documents/swga_211.zip

Andi