W3C WBS Home

Results of Questionnaire Request for Input on organizing accessibility API binding work in PFWG and HTML WG

The results of this questionnaire are available to anybody.

This questionnaire was open from 2008-11-28 to 2008-12-10.

9 answers have been received.

Jump to results for question:

  1. Distinct deliverables
  2. Organizational assumptions
  3. Separate, communicating teams or one joint team
  4. Will you contribute?
  5. Present involvement

1. Distinct deliverables

Let's talk in terms of four distinct deliverables:

  1. [aria-impl] WAI-ARIA implementation guidelines, including whatever they say about either binding all the way to accessibility APIs or some neutral abstraction.
    .. published under PFWG Charter. Separate from ARIA spec, rendezvous in CR.
  2. [html5-api] guidelines or spec rules for mapping HTML5 features to accessibility APIs.
    .. published under HTML WG Charter.
    .. may be subsumed into one or another of the HTML5 deliverables as they see fit.
  3. [aria-ts] the tests that are used to get WAI-ARIA through CR.
    .. published under PFWG Charter.
  4. [html5-ts] the tests that are used to get HTML5 through CR.
    .. published under HTML WG Charter.

We will talk about possibly bundling some of these in joint workgroups, but I think they should come out as separate deliverables.

Question:Do you agree the work should be published in these four pieces? Please note any suggested variations from this breakout in the 'comment' field.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
yes 4
no 5

Details

Responder Distinct deliverablesComments
Anne van Kesteren no I don't think it's good to decide upfront how the various pieces are to be split among documents. It seems better to do more research first into what actually needs to be defined here.
Ben Millard yes This looks compatible with the way ARIA integration was envisaged at the Breakout session in France 2008. (Mutually agreed "hooks" which are used in the HTML5 spec, which ARIA then specifies in detail.)
Shawn Medero no There's not enough detail here for me to make an informed decision. I'd like to see a discussion thread on this topic brew for a while and see if there is any consensus on what the above deliverables means.
Aaron Leventhal no I think this group should be responsible for 1 & 2. If we add all the tests it becomes a bit large I think.

But, I can probably be convinced if I learn what kind of work 3 & 4 will entail.
Frederick Boland no
Gregory Rosmaita yes
Maciej Stachowiak no As other commentors have mentioned, it's not clear if we can decide up-front if this is the best split. I think there may be interactions between HTML5 requirements and ARIA requirements that make this not the best split.
Tony Ross yes Specifically having the test suites in addition to the specs will help ensure interoperability. Each test suite should be done by the same group that writes the corresponding spec for consistency.
Anna Zhuang yes

2. Organizational assumptions

Unless we receive feedback to the contrary, organizing will go forward on the following assumptions.

Question: can you live with these assumptions governing the plan? Please explain alternatives and reasons in the comment field if you answer 'no.'

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
yes 9
no

Details

Responder Organizational assumptionsComments
Anne van Kesteren yes I'm currently short on time, but if I were to participate not having to join the PFWG would make things a lot easier for me. In addition, I would like to add another requirement, that all work happens in public. I guess this would automatically follow from a joint Task Force with the HTMLWG.
Ben Millard yes
Shawn Medero yes
Aaron Leventhal yes I'm only against it if it means one of the major browser vendors cannot participate.

I am curious, does this exclude test tool developers that are not part of W3C from participating? That would not make or break it for me, although I'd like it if those people can have continual read access to the document. Ideally the drafts would be public at all times.
Frederick Boland yes
Gregory Rosmaita yes while i welcome participation from anyone in any group, i think that this is something best developed in a PFWG task force "plus" -- that is, rather than a joint task force (something with which i have had a negative experience already), a task force under PF aegis with participation from non-PFWG members
Maciej Stachowiak yes
Tony Ross yes
Anna Zhuang yes

3. Separate, communicating teams or one joint team

The WAI-ARIA and HTML work could be done by separate but cooperating teams, or we could form a joint task force to develop deliverables for both groups.

Please indicate which you prefer. You may qualify your answer in the comment field.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Separate: PFWG charters a Task Force which develops the WAI-ARIA Implementation Guidelines with TBD level of responsibility for test development. HTML develops API binding guidance for HTML5 either in a Task Force or not but in communication with the WAI-ARIA Implementation Task Force. 1
Joint: PFWG and HTML WG together charter a Joint Task Force that drafts both the WAI-ARIA Implementation Guidelines and whatever HTML WG publishes as guidance on the binding of HTML5 to accessibility APIs. 7

(1 response didn't contain an answer to this question)

Details

Responder Separate, communicating teams or one joint teamComments
Anne van Kesteren Joint: PFWG and HTML WG together charter a Joint Task Force that drafts both the WAI-ARIA Implementation Guidelines and whatever HTML WG publishes as guidance on the binding of HTML5 to accessibility APIs. I prefer joint mostly because that would imply that the Task Force operates in public, which the PFWG unfortunately does not.
Ben Millard Separate: PFWG charters a Task Force which develops the WAI-ARIA Implementation Guidelines with TBD level of responsibility for test development. HTML develops API binding guidance for HTML5 either in a Task Force or not but in communication with the WAI-ARIA Implementation Task Force. This sounds most like the "hooking" idea from France 2008.
Shawn Medero Joint: PFWG and HTML WG together charter a Joint Task Force that drafts both the WAI-ARIA Implementation Guidelines and whatever HTML WG publishes as guidance on the binding of HTML5 to accessibility APIs. When PFWG & HTML WG have worked in parallel in the past the results have been better than when we've worked in a bubble and then tried to reconciled the differences. Additionally PFWG & HTML WG's existing charters are conflict with each other -- in terms of membership requirements and public/private concerns
Aaron Leventhal Joint: PFWG and HTML WG together charter a Joint Task Force that drafts both the WAI-ARIA Implementation Guidelines and whatever HTML WG publishes as guidance on the binding of HTML5 to accessibility APIs.
Frederick Boland
Gregory Rosmaita Joint: PFWG and HTML WG together charter a Joint Task Force that drafts both the WAI-ARIA Implementation Guidelines and whatever HTML WG publishes as guidance on the binding of HTML5 to accessibility APIs. i know that this answer may seem to be in conflict with my previous comment, but i strongly believe that the HTML WG needs guidance which can only be provided by the PFWG -- therefore, if the choice is binary, as presented in this form, i would choose a joint task force to ensure not only cooperation and to expedite the process, but to foster better understanding of the interactions of the technologies involved
Maciej Stachowiak Joint: PFWG and HTML WG together charter a Joint Task Force that drafts both the WAI-ARIA Implementation Guidelines and whatever HTML WG publishes as guidance on the binding of HTML5 to accessibility APIs. This will best avoid conflicting requirements.
Tony Ross Joint: PFWG and HTML WG together charter a Joint Task Force that drafts both the WAI-ARIA Implementation Guidelines and whatever HTML WG publishes as guidance on the binding of HTML5 to accessibility APIs. This should be the most efficient since the people participating will likely overlap significantly between PFWG and HTML WG, so long as working jointly doesn’t slow the progress of the work already started on the ARIA implementer’s guide.
Anna Zhuang Joint: PFWG and HTML WG together charter a Joint Task Force that drafts both the WAI-ARIA Implementation Guidelines and whatever HTML WG publishes as guidance on the binding of HTML5 to accessibility APIs.

4. Will you contribute?

Please give us a rough idea of how much you expect to be involved in this work.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
I presently expect to be working on this topic, either as it affects WAI-ARIA or HTML. 3
I might want to work on this, but I need to know more about what the work is to do. 3
I don't expect to be directly involved in the development of these deliverables. (Site developers and others with a dependency on this work please identify your interest in the topic in the comment field.) 1

(2 responses didn't contain an answer to this question)

Details

Responder Will you contribute?Comments
Anne van Kesteren I might want to work on this, but I need to know more about what the work is to do. It largely depends on whether Simon has time to feed through information from Opera.
Ben Millard I might want to work on this, but I need to know more about what the work is to do. This is one of many things I'm interested in helping with. But my current funding ends on 1st December 2008 and I have yet to secure new funding.
Shawn Medero I might want to work on this, but I need to know more about what the work is to do.
Aaron Leventhal I presently expect to be working on this topic, either as it affects WAI-ARIA or HTML.
Frederick Boland
Gregory Rosmaita I presently expect to be working on this topic, either as it affects WAI-ARIA or HTML. can http://a11y.org/a11y-dom-api be leveraged for part of this process?
Maciej Stachowiak I don't expect to be directly involved in the development of these deliverables. (Site developers and others with a dependency on this work please identify your interest in the topic in the comment field.) My personal involvement will probably be limited to technical review of deliverables.
Tony Ross I presently expect to be working on this topic, either as it affects WAI-ARIA or HTML.
Anna Zhuang

5. Present involvement

Tell us about your current involvement.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
I am a Participant in PFWG or HTML WG. I have made a commitment to abide by the W3C Patent Policy. 7
I am not presently active in W3C.
I am a Participant in another affected W3C group (identify the group in the comment field). 1

(1 response didn't contain an answer to this question)

Details

Responder Present involvement Comments
Anne van Kesteren I am a Participant in PFWG or HTML WG. I have made a commitment to abide by the W3C Patent Policy.
Ben Millard I am a Participant in PFWG or HTML WG. I have made a commitment to abide by the W3C Patent Policy. Research into how authors use HTML and applying this to the design and development of HTML5 accessibility features.
Shawn Medero I am a Participant in PFWG or HTML WG. I have made a commitment to abide by the W3C Patent Policy.
Aaron Leventhal I am a Participant in PFWG or HTML WG. I have made a commitment to abide by the W3C Patent Policy.
Frederick Boland
Gregory Rosmaita I am a Participant in PFWG or HTML WG. I have made a commitment to abide by the W3C Patent Policy. i am a participant in PFWG, HTML WG and the XHTML2 WG
Maciej Stachowiak I am a Participant in PFWG or HTML WG. I have made a commitment to abide by the W3C Patent Policy. I am a participant in the HTML WG.
Tony Ross I am a Participant in PFWG or HTML WG. I have made a commitment to abide by the W3C Patent Policy.
Anna Zhuang I am a Participant in another affected W3C group (identify the group in the comment field). Monitoring PFWG and member of EOWG

More details on responses

Non-responders

The following persons have not answered the questionnaire:

  1. George Kerscher <kerscher@montana.com>
  2. Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
  3. Geoff Freed <geoff_freed@wgbh.org>
  4. Jon Gunderson <jongund@illinois.edu>
  5. Gregg Vanderheiden <gregg@raisingthefloor.org>
  6. Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
  7. T.V. Raman <raman@google.com>
  8. Cynthia Shelly <cyns@microsoft.com>
  9. Sean Hayes <sean.hayes@microsoft.com>
  10. Lisa Seeman <lisa.seeman@zoho.com>
  11. Markus Gylling <markus.gylling@gmail.com>
  12. Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
  13. Gottfried Zimmermann <zimmermann@accesstechnologiesgroup.com>
  14. Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
  15. Deborah Dahl <dahl@conversational-technologies.com>
  16. Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>
  17. Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
  18. James Nurthen <james.nurthen@oracle.com>
  19. Kentarou Fukuda <kentarou@jp.ibm.com>
  20. Georgios Grigoriadis <georgios.grigoriadis@sap.com>
  21. Stefan Schnabel <stefan.schnabel@sap.com>
  22. Diego La Monica <d.lamonica@webprofession.com>
  23. Charles Chen <clchen@google.com>
  24. Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>
  25. John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
  26. Kenny Johar <kensingh@microsoft.com>
  27. Karl Groves <kgroves@paciellogroup.com>
  28. Sally Cain <sally.cain@rnib.org.uk>
  29. Joseph Scheuhammer <clown@alum.mit.edu>
  30. David Bolter <dbolter@mozilla.com>
  31. James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>
  32. Martin Schaus <martin.schaus@sap.com>
  33. Matthew King <mattking@us.ibm.com>
  34. Léonie Watson <lwatson@paciellogroup.com>
  35. Mary Jo Mueller <maryjom@us.ibm.com>
  36. James Hawkins <jhawkins@google.com>
  37. Alex Qiang Chen <chenqa@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
  38. Jason Kiss <jason@accessibleculture.org>
  39. Scott González <scott.gonzalez@gmail.com>
  40. Shilpi Kapoor <shilpi@barrierbreak.com>
  41. Alexander Surkov <surkov.alexander@gmail.com>
  42. Rajesh Lal <raj.lal@nokia.com>
  43. Dominic Mazzoni <dmazzoni@google.com>
  44. Alexandre Morgaut <alexandre.morgaut@4d.com>
  45. Wei Wu <wuwei@w3.org>
  46. Billy Gregory <bgregory@paciellogroup.com>
  47. Mark Sadecki <mark@w3.org>
  48. Mona Heath <mbh@illinois.edu>
  49. Suzanne Taylor <Suzanne.Taylor@pearson.com>
  50. Jean-Bernard Piot <jean-bernard.piot@4d.com>
  51. Marta Pawlowska <m.pawlowska@samsung.com>
  52. Jaesik Chang <jaesik.chang@samsung.com>
  53. Dr Kinshuk <kinshuk@ieee.org>
  54. Marco Zehe <marco.zehe@googlemail.com>
  55. Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com>
  56. Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com>
  57. Susann Keohane <skeohane@us.ibm.com>
  58. Birkir Gunnarsson <birkir.gunnarsson@deque.com>
  59. Christopher Gallello <cgallell@microsoft.com>

Send an email to all the non-responders.


Compact view of the results / list of email addresses of the responders

WBS home / Questionnaires / WG questionnaires / Answer this questionnaire


Completed and maintained by Dominique Hazaël-Massieux (dom@w3.org) on an original design by Michael Sperberg-McQueen $Id: showv.php3,v 1.123 2013-09-26 09:46:56 dom Exp $. Please send bug reports and request for enhancements to dom@w3.org with w3t-sys@w3.org copied (if your mail client supports it, send mail directly to the right persons)