Aglet

Prioritize file type mismatches by failed workflow consequence

Type mismatches deserve different urgency when they prevent a prepared file from entering a workflow than when they merely remove an optional picker hint. Prioritization should consider whether a misleading signal causes wasted transfer or allows an unsupported file to proceed.

Decide where the work belongs

  1. Name the user consequence

    Record whether the file is rejected before transfer, after transfer, or only during later processing. Note preparation effort, transfer time, and downstream action affected, keeping a false acceptance distinct from an early and understandable refusal.

  2. Map the classification surfaces

    List picker filters, filename displays, upload requests, validation messages, previews, and processing results that expose type information. Identify which surfaces share a rule and which use separate signals or labels.

  3. Choose the queue

    Queue rule alignment when the documented type policy is applied inconsistently, hint repair when acceptance is correct but selection guidance misleads, or message repair when the rejection lacks a useful next action. Attach the complete signal comparison.

What to carry forward

Prioritize the case when a misleading type signal wastes a transfer or permits an unsupported file to reach a later stage. A clear early rejection with an accurate next action can wait behind cases where classification changes after users have committed work.

Technical background: MDN reference.

Keep the decision with the work.

Use a Work Item in Aglet to record the problem, the evidence you have, and the next decision. Add an owner and priority, then keep updates in the discussion so the next person can follow the reasoning.

Create an account See the product workflow