- From: Detlev Fischer <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>
- Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2019 20:38:33 +0200
- To: "Sahasrabudhe, Shrirang P" <ssahasrabudhe@ets.org>
- Cc: Denis Boudreau <denis.boudreau@deque.com>, "public-silver@w3.org" <public-silver@w3.org>
Honestly this sounds very complex - I have no idea how that should work as part of a standardised conformance Evaluation process. It would imply that anyone doing this new kind of conformance work would need access to prior test results and make sense of these (or carry out explicit user testing as part of the work). This can certainly be valuable for organisations that want to optimise their internal processes - but it seems an order of magnitude more complex (and time-consuming, expensive) than what we and others currently do for clients that want proof of conformance to WCAG. Just to be clear, we practice and highly value user testing (see accessuse.eu) it is just very hard to connect its results to standard requirements of replicable tests. Detlev Sent from phone > Am 09.04.2019 um 15:12 schrieb Sahasrabudhe, Shrirang P <ssahasrabudhe@ets.org>: > > testing outcomes and related improvements could be linked to specific methods for instance, or techniques or what not, and we could measure just how many of the improvements came directly from involving end users with disabilities in the overall process.
Received on Tuesday, 9 April 2019 18:39:02 UTC