W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2016

Re[4]: Let's add an approved date field to Failures and Techniques

From: <josh@interaccess.ie>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 13:45:21 +0000
To: "White, Jason J" <jjwhite@ets.org>, "Andrew Kirkpatrick" <akirkpat@adobe.com>, "Gian Wild" <gian@accessibilityoz.com>, "David MacDonald" <david100@sympatico.ca>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, "w3c WAI List" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-Id: <em421d52a2-2ad5-4349-8882-9cf8118ae1ff@josh_machine>

------ Original Message ------
From: "White, Jason J" <jjwhite@ets.org>
[...]
>My concern about date-stamping failures is that failures are not 
>normative and we already have plenty of confusion about that.  [...]
>
>
>
>I agree. Anything which tends to reinforce a perception that 
>techniques/failures are normative is problematic, in my view.
>
Agreed, but we do get lost in our own jargon. Most devs don't consider 
normative/non-normative at all - and do consider anything
we publish as 'best practice' - which is questionable.

Thanks

Josh

>
>
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or 
>confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for 
>whom it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received 
>this e-mail in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, 
>distribute, or take any action in reliance on the contents of this 
>information; and delete it from your system. Any other use of this 
>e-mail is prohibited.
>
>
>Thank you for your compliance.
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 27 April 2016 13:43:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 27 April 2016 13:43:56 UTC