Non-intersecting design discussions

There are a few non-intersecting design discussions taking place that are important not to confuse with one another..
‘Design for usability, safety, accessibility and inclusion’ is a conversation about ‘rights and needs’, not to be taken lightly and never a ‘laughing or joking’ matter.
Similarly, ‘Design for help’ is a conversation about reach-based contexts which includes ‘instructional help’, ‘guides’ as well as ‘instructional-based contexts, design learning contexts and service learning help contexts.
‘Design for emotion’ is a conversation about how an experience appeals to a persons good sense and emotional well-being.
‘Design for error’ is also a conversation about safety, accessibility and security from the perspective of the ‘least common denominator’ including the ‘comedy of errors’, which typically takes place as a ‘lighthearted and integrated process during testing’. Error based design includes map-based learning and learning based contexts (within help) and syntax design processes for login, safety registration and so forth.
‘Design for meaning’ is a conversation about ‘missing meaning contexts’ which intersect in every aspect of our lives in one way or another. The unicode consortium is a consortium specifically catering to managing progressive processes and policy contexts within this space.
‘Design for legibility’ is a conversation specifically devoted to discussions around legibility, readability and understandability of language contexts and language accessibility issues governing how we understand and relate to ‘importance’.
These are just a few off the top of my head.