W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-ert-tsdtf@w3.org > December 2006

RE: sc2.5.1_l1_003 step 2: Structure review

From: Carlos Iglesias <carlos.iglesias@fundacionctic.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 16:28:01 +0100
Message-ID: <09700B613C4DD84FA9F2FEA5218828190199C419@ayalga.fundacionctic.org>
To: "Shadi Abou-Zahra" <shadi@w3.org>
Cc: <public-wai-ert-tsdtf@w3.org>

Hi Shadi, everybody.

> Thanks for completing your action items! I think you've shown 
> a couple of inconsistencies and issues with the checklists 
> that we need to discuss on the teleconference and update.
> Do you have other observations or ideas from carrying out 
> these reviews?

Some random thoughts:

- There is a technology dependency (JS) in the sc2.5.1_l1_002 test sample. In this case the related technique is specifically about client-side validation, so it's quite obvious we should need client-side technology, but do we need to explicitly say it in the metadata? (the baseline again) 

- Right now I still don't get the whole ruleset thing for the objectives of this TF. In the uploaded test cases the rule elements point to an xml document with a series of rulesets. I think we should think about restricting these pointers to direct WCAG2 references.

- I'm not sure about how minimal should the test samples be, I mean the sc2.5.1_l1_002 test sample is compound just of a label and an input, it's minimal and complete from the point of view of automatic validation, but it doesn't look complete at all from an user perspective.

> Approximately how long did each review take?

Let's say between half an hour and three quarters, which I think is too much time, but we should take into consideration that it was a "first review" and it's expected that this time will decrease.

> Do you have 
> ideas for improving the process and reducing the effort 
> needed for reviews?

IMO trying to scrutinize the XML directly is quite a rough work. It may help if we provide a web interface to see the metadata. Obviously as much automatic verification as we can do will also be helpful.

Step 3 is a more light process but I think it could also be lightly facilitated if the links to relevant techniques and test procedures are directly provided (instead of having to scrutinize inside the XML again)



Carlos Iglesias

CTIC Foundation
Science and Technology Park of Gijón
33203 - Gijón, Asturias, Spain 

phone: +34 984291212
fax: +34 984390612
email: carlos.iglesias@fundacionctic.org
URL: http://www.fundacionctic.org
Received on Monday, 18 December 2006 15:28:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:06:00 UTC