Should ARIA adopt a process that provides improved experimentation support?

[MelSumner]

I would like to propose that we consider adopting a process similar to The TC39 Process: https://tc39.es/process-document/

The Stages approach could provide some explicit relief for implementors that wish to explore new ideas before proposing specification change.

Changes to the language are developed by way of a process which provides guidelines for evolving an addition from an idea to a fully specified feature, complete with acceptance tests and multiple implementations.

We do have some of the process described in these stages today, but I think we're missing something around gathering more user feedback, how to handle author errors, and unlock implementor experimentation.

We seem to currently have a problem of "well, implementors did this thing, and it might be against current spec but we can't change it now". This can be frustrating for all involved.

I think we end up creating more confusion for authors the more we try to auto-fix their errors; ultimately this will be worse for the users we are trying to help. Perhaps unlocking experimentation process could make this an improved working environment for everyone.

[spectranaut]

Delayed, but here are the notes from TPAC on this topic :) https://www.w3.org/2024/09/23-aria-minutes