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

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

From: Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo <coordina@sidar.org>
Date: Mon, 2 May 2016 14:11:03 +0200
To: "'Gregg Vanderheiden RTF'" <gregg@raisingthefloor.org>, "'Jason J White'" <jjwhite@ets.org>
Cc: "'David MacDonald'" <david100@sympatico.ca>, "'Katie Haritos-Shea'" <ryladog@gmail.com>, "'IG - WAI Interest Group List list'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, "'GLWAI Guidelines WG org'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <0ab101d1a46b$b2e71680$18b54380$@sidar.org>
+1 for “last reviewed date”

 

 

Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo

Patrono y Directora General

Fundación Sidar - Acceso Universal

Email:  <mailto:coordina@sidar.org> coordina@sidar.org

Personal:  <mailto:Emmanuelle@sidar.org> Emmanuelle@sidar.org

Web:  <http://sidar.org> http://sidar.org

 

 

 

De: Gregg Vanderheiden RTF [mailto:gregg@raisingthefloor.org] 
Enviado el: lunes, 02 de mayo de 2016 2:15
Para: Jason J White
CC: David MacDonald; Katie Haritos-Shea; IG - WAI Interest Group List list; GLWAI Guidelines WG org
Asunto: Re: Let's add an approved date field to Failures and Techniques

 

 

 

On May 1, 2016, at 6:46 PM, White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org> wrote:

 

Dates on techniques don’t concern me as much as dates on “failures” would do. The latter can be misinterpreted as implying that a given practice wasn’t a failure before a certain date but became a failure thereafter, whereas we’ve established in this discussion that if a documented practice constitutes a failure to conform to WCAG 2.0, then it always was and always will be a failure to conform to WCAG 2.0.

 

 

Agree.

 

would using “Last Reviewed Date”  get around your concern? 

 

that would make it clear it was related to reviewing rather than dates that things apply. 
Received on Monday, 2 May 2016 12:11:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 12:11:40 UTC