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: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 2 May 2016 11:19:34 -0400
Message-ID: <BLU436-SMTP950A91939D26559C7C62EDFE790@phx.gbl>
To: Gregg Vanderheiden RTF <gregg@raisingthefloor.org>
CC: 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>
​>>​
If it is a failure, it was always a failure.    We can’t define a new
situation that fails when it didn’t before.
 We are just documenting it now for informational value — for convenience.Can
you help me understand this?

​I don't think documenting something makes it a new failure...Google is
documenting the roads in North America, but they existed before the
documentation.


There may be a number of reasons for adding a failure technique:

- it may be more of a problem now than it was in the past even though it
always was a technical failure
- we may have overlooked it even though the success criteria clearly
indicate it as a failure (i.e., not identifying regions in text or
programatically)
- elegant solutions may have emerged that cause us to want to enforce a
failure more proactively
​- confusion may have arisen in the interpretation​ of a Sc, and the
failure helps add clarity


Cheers,
David MacDonald



*Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
Tel:  613.235.4902

LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>

twitter.com/davidmacd

GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>

www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/>



*  Adapting the web to all users*
*            Including those with disabilities*

If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
<http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>

On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 8:03 PM, Gregg Vanderheiden RTF <
gregg@raisingthefloor.org> wrote:

>
> On May 1, 2016, at 6:23 PM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> However, documenting a date when we created a failure (or last approved)
> might give jurisdictions information that they might find useful when they
> are making policy and/or laws.
>
>
> Hi David  -  I don’t understand this statement.    Documenting a failure -
> does not make it a new failure.
>
> If it is a failure, it was always a failure.    We can’t define a new
> situation that fails when it didn’t before.
>  We are just documenting it now for informational value — for convenience.
>
> Can you help me understand this?
>
>
>
>
> By the way — a whole heartedly agree with dating Techs & Failures to help
> in determining when they should be reviewed.
>
> in that case though I would suggest the date be  “LAST REVIEWED ON “
>  rather than when they were created.
>
>
>
> Gregg
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 2 May 2016 15:20:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 15:20:11 UTC