Living Document (Cross-Pollination)

[AlexDawsonUK]

Issue: It took decades to get WCAG versions to REC status. We may encounter issues with the need to evolve quickly and update. This may also affect the turnaround for getting IG Statements through the release process as the rapid evolution of the sustainability sector may require updates to certain materials (such as evidence EG. URLs) on a regular basis.

Solution: Content that can remain in a static state such as the Guidelines and SCs can remain in the core specification in versioned stasis where release cycles will be naturally slower. Content that requires regular maintainence or updates such as URLs (references) will be offered through cross-referencing from the main specification into Notes, or if conflicts arise and separation of concerns is required the potential for CG Reports can be utilized. Its also been noted that the duel-group status can also function if regulatory issues become a factor and a WG is required to be established at a later date where the WG can handle those aspects of a spec that require the coverage it provides, and an IG can provide coverage of what remains.

[TzviyaSiegman]

The timeline for WCAG (which was originally published in the 1990s isn't really relevant. Tech, computing, and the W3C have gotten much faster. WCAG 2.0 to 2.1 took 10 years. 2.2 took 5 years, including a pandemic. This is a different standard, so I don't see the relevance.