RE: Let's add an approved date field to Failures and Techniques

From: Katie Haritos-Shea []
Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2016 10:43 AM

In my mind dating would work as an aid to understanding its rationale.

So someone seeing a failure of using ARIA a certain way wouldn't think "well this failure is rediculous, ARIA didnt exist in 2008".... or "blink? We havent used it in years".

We understand common failures are never normative.

We know they are never normative.

I would prefer to avoid dates, and instead make the documentation explicit about what technologies an author has to rely upon in order for the problematic usage to arise.

I’m also comfortable with the idea of documenting “cautions” or “warnings” rather than “failures”, particularly if there are special cases in which the usage in question might be legitimate.


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 Saturday, 30 April 2016 14:50:01 UTC