W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-comments-wcag20@w3.org > March 2011

Re: F61: 24 hours?

From: Loretta Guarino Reid <lorettaguarino@google.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 15:54:09 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTik74Jpt78B+=bASFa7NSqY3h4CoXe+vBsjvM7iq@mail.gmail.com>
To: makoto.ueki@gmail.com
Cc: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 1:47 AM, <noreply@w3.org> wrote:

>
> Name: Makoto Ueki
> Email: makoto.ueki@gmail.com
> Affiliation: Infoaxia, Inc.
> Document: TD
> Item Number: F61
> Part of Item: Tests
> Comment Type: general comment
> Summary of Issue: F61: 24 hours?
> Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change):
> Procedure #2 reads "leave the content open for 24 hours". I can live with
> this, but leaving the content open for 24 hours is not a realistic way. 1
> hour or even half an hour would also be fine.
>
> Proposed Change:
> Why "24 hours"?
> Had better change it so that the authors can test the content in reality.
>
> ================================
Response from the Working Group
================================

People often take many hours to complete a page.   Having it change on them
unexpectedly in 30 minutes or an hour is not acceptable.   if it changed at
90 minutes that should be detected.   Only checking for 30 minutes would
miss this.

24 hours is more than enough time to check that there is not a timed
refresh.   30 or 60 minutes is not enough.   We chose 24 hours because that
gave the user a day to complete task.

We realize that there is no time period that guarantees that the data will
NEVER be updated automatically. We are updating the technique to provide
more flexibility in the testing approach.


Loretta Guarino Reid, WCAG WG Co-Chair
Gregg Vanderheiden, WCAG WG Co-Chair
Michael Cooper, WCAG WG Staff Contact
Received on Wednesday, 23 March 2011 22:54:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:11:13 UTC