Should the ARIA WG standardize heuristic-based ignoring of ARIA and related features? And if so, how?

[cookiecrook]

Should the ARIA WG standardize heuristic-based ignoring of ARIA and related features? And if so, how?

One pre-existing example is how engines now ignore aria-hidden in certain scenarios where it's clearly an author mistake.

To prevent authors erroneously hiding entire window-rendered documents only to those using assistive technology, user agents MUST NOT expose the hidden state to assistive technologies if it is specified on the root element or the host language element that represents the contents of the primary document in view.

Another example I've become aware of recently is misuse of the aria-modal attribute. Some Amazon pages, until recently, included a modal dialog that was erroneously persistent. This prevented a lot of VO-based navigation from working. Thankfully Amazon fixed some or all of these instances, but it was impactful, that Apple plans to ship a WebKit change preventing web authors from being able to cause quite such an egregious disruption again.

I'm curious if others in the WG would like to discuss tracking some or all of these heuristic engine changes in or near the spec, and if so, in what format.

[cookiecrook]

Perhaps an automatically updated list (ReSpec classname hook?) outside the spec, so we could combine exceptions from multiple specs into a WPT-testable list?