WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: WebAIM-Forum Digest, Vol 129, Issue 1

for

From: Cliff Tyllick
Date: Dec 1, 2015 2:43PM

Thanks for the clarification! That github makes it easy for others to use the documentation as a starting point for their own version, either expanded or streamlined, is particularly attractive. Julie, I'll follow up with you off line.

Maybe if I can create a working example, WAI will react with more enthusiasm and less puzzlement. 😀

Cliff

Sent from my iPhone
Although its spellcheck often saves me, all goofs in sent messages are its fault.

On Dec 1, 2015, at 3:10 PM, Julie Lewis < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:

>>>
>>> From: Cliff Tyllick < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Nov 30, 2015, at 9:07 AM, Julie Lewis < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Is there any reason the accessibility community can¹t use github for
>>>>>> this?
>>>>>> We could even maintain a plain language version of the WCAG
>>>>>> recommendations there. ;^)
>>>>>>> 2. The accessibility community should build and maintain an
>>>>>>> application any Web professional can use to discover known
>>>>>>> techniques for producing usable and accessible interactions in
>>>>>>> the presentation technology they are using.
>>>
>>>> Julie, it matters who hosts it because the host is the entity that
>>>> affirms that these are valid solutions. If it's produced by everyone on
>>>> this list collaborating as friends of mine, then the attorneys who
>>>> opine on whether a corporation is protected from the risk of having
>>>> done the wrong thing will say, "Well, that's interesting, but it's just
>>>> what Cliff's friends say. What does the body that made the standards
>>>> say?"
>>>>
>>>> But if the very same people do the very same work as a working group of
>>>> the WAI, those attorneys will say, "Yes, our developers and project
>>>> managers can adequately reduce our risk by using these tools, because
>>>> the body that developed the standards also developed these tools."
>
> OK maybe I wasn't clear. You talk about "the accessibility community"
> developing and maintaining a tool. (That doesn't sound "authoritative" to
> me.) In fact that tool already exists.
>
> It is possible to create and host your own github repository - many
> private companies use it this way for source control. But then I think
> you lose the visibility and "street cred" that github has with developers.
> And it costs $.
>
> Either way - you set up the project so that one or more people act as
> gatekeepers for any code or documentation, that someone wants to add to
> the repository. WAI - or whatever organization is deemed authoritative -
> would create the project and set themselves up as gatekeeper(s).
>
> Even better - github lets anyone "clone" the project so they have a local
> copy that they can do whatever they need to with. That is what it is made
> for. If they make improvements, they can request that the improvements be
> reviewed by WAI - who can either accept and add them to the master, or
> reject them for whatever reason. All documented, all done in the open.
>
> My point is that "hosting" is different from "control". The tool can be
> hosted anywhere, what is important is who controls what gets added to the
> repository.
>
> And note message 12. WCAG is already using github for the spec.
>
> > > >