well that’s yet another mightily interesting piece of news you provided here. The basic principle seems awesome. I have a concern though: aren’t these projects, in some way, into a sort of detrimental competition? Since the added meta-data will be updated separately and provided through two different techical means, and in some cases may even be of different quality, the users will be forced to make a choice between one and another. Because even if we can expect that both communities will do a great job at improving the meta-data, at least for a while there will be gaps and lacks, fulfilled by the other one. It would be excessively optimistic to expect that all the contributors will fill the gaps of any crowdsourcing-based accessibility project once they have found a glitch to be fixed on a given website.

Shouldn’t these projects talk to each other, and share whatever data are contributed? What’s your view on this?