W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg@w3.org > November 2008

Re: A few more evaluation procedures for addendum to BP (ACTION-872)

From: Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi>
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2008 17:50:50 +0000
Message-ID: <49132E7A.4070003@mtld.mobi>
To: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
CC: public-bpwg <public-bpwg@w3.org>

I think this looks fine, but I am wondering which sections we are 
limiting the document to - I assume that we mean

Relevant Device Properties
Additional Interpretation of the Best Practices
Evaluation Procedure (not Test)
Examples

Only "Evaluation procedure" being mandatory, though I'd have thought 
that Examples would generally be useful?

Jo

On 21/10/2008 15:45, Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I took an action item earlier today to provide a rewrite of a few more
> tests for the addendum to BP (aka BP 1.5), which I have done and
> inserted in Kai's latest draft, and published at:
> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/mobileOKPro/drafts/ED-mobileOK-pro10-tests-20081021.html
> 
> The relevant part is at:
> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/mobileOKPro/drafts/ED-mobileOK-pro10-tests-20081021.html#access_keys
> 
> I have rewritten access keys, auto refresh, avoid free text, background
> image readability, balance, with the following changes:
>  * used a more compact format, removing the empty "notes to bpwg" and
> co,
>  * added a "relevant device properties" item at the top of the list, in
> the light of our discussions on the relation of these evaluations
> procedures with the DDC
>  * reworded avoid free text, background image, and balance to recast
> them as evaluation procedure rather than tests
> 
> (I probably would have substantive comments on some of these, but I
> tried to keep my changes editorial for the time being)
> 
> HTH,
> 
> Dom
> 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 6 November 2008 17:51:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:42:59 UTC