- From: Léonie Watson <tink@tink.uk>
- Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 05:55:15 +0000
- To: Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com>, ARIA Working Group <public-aria@w3.org>
+1 Seems like a good idea to me. Duplicated content is rarely a good thing. On 16/11/2017 20:16, Joanmarie Diggs wrote: > Hey all. > > As was discussed during today's call, I would like to remove the mapping > table from AccName "AAM" because: > > 1. That information is largely already in Core AAM. I see no good reason > to have duplicate information. > > 2. It would simplify testing of AccName (which hasn't yet entered CR), > both in terms of tests we'd need to write and get results for and in > terms of exit criteria. > > If you all agree, then I'd also want to tweak the name of the spec so > that it no longer contains the "AAM" since the "M" stands for "Mappings" > and those would have been removed. > > Since we need to write tests, get results, and define exit criteria > essentially now, having your thoughts on this matter soonish would be great. > > Thanks in advance! > --joanie > -- @LeonieWatson @tink@toot.cafe tink.uk carpe diem
Received on Friday, 17 November 2017 05:55:55 UTC