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

Re: Minimum number of techniques in metadata

From: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 21:23:43 +0100
Message-ID: <45465F4F.6030805@w3.org>
To: cstrobbe <Christophe.Strobbe@esat.kuleuven.be>
Cc: public-wai-ert-tsdtf@w3.org

Hi Christophe,

I'm sorry, I'm also a little confused. How does this relate to Success 
Criteria and Location Pointers? Here is what I think you are proposing, 
please confirm:

* Each "Test Sample" maps to exactly one "Success Criteria";
* Each "Test Sample" can map to one or more "Technique" (or "Failure"), 
each of which again map to the initial "Success Criteria";
* Each "Technique" is identified within the "Location" property so that 
one can locate which part of the sample has which effect.

Best,
   Shadi


cstrobbe wrote:
> Hi Vangelis, All,
> 
> Quoting Evangelos Vlachogiannis <evlach@aegean.gr>:
>> So does this "Each WCAG 2.0 Test Sample must be linked to
>>  exactly one WCAG 2.0 technique or failure, .. " applies?
>>
>> If we mean that an "anti-technique" test sample needs to link 
>> to the technique (the way I have developed the committed tests)
>> I think we need to clarify this in document. 
>> (Otherwise make techniques optional?? - dont think..)
> 
> I think we're getting confused here. (Maybe because I called failures 
> "anti-techniques"?)
> What I meant is:
> Each test sample links to
> - exactly one WCAG 2.0 failure 
>   [= test sample demonstrates failure],
> - exactly one WCAG 2.0 technique
>   [= test sample demonstrates technique],
> - more than one WCAG 2.0 technique if more than one 
>   technique is required to meet a success criterion
>   [= test sample demonstrates combination of techniques
>   that are need to meet a success criterion].
> 
> Of course, none of this is meant to imply that certain techniques are 
> "normative" or "required" for conformance (see Tim's mail). Maybe we 
> can add a note about this at "techniques".
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Christophe
> 
>> regards,
>> Vangelis
>>
>> cstrobbe wrote:
>>> Hi Vangelis, All,
>>>
>>> Quoting Evangelos Vlachogiannis <evlach@aegean.gr>:
>>>> Hi Christophe, all,
>>>>
>>>> I am sure there will be more ... so I think we need to go for it.
>>>>
>>>> Additionally, I am not sure if for every failure of a technique
>> there
>>>> is 
>>>>   a "failure" in the techniques document (??)..
>>> Well, "failures" are failures of success criteria, not failures of
>>> techniques. You could also call them "anti-techniques" (cf "anti-
>>> patterns").
>>> The WCAG WG didn't create techniques where those would have been
>> just 
>>> negative versions of success criteria; they needed to be more
>> specific.
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Christophe
>>>
>>>> regards,
>>>> Vangelis
>>>>
>>>> cstrobbe wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Currently, the usage document [1] states: "Each each [sic] WCAG
>> 2.0
>>>>> Test Sample must be linked to exactly one WCAG 2.0 technique or 
>>>>> failure."
>>>>> However, some success criteria require a combination of
>> techniques,
>>>> for 
>>>>> example SC 2.4.2: "More than one way is available to locate
>> content
>>>>> within a set of Web units..." [2]. 
>>>>> Should we loosen up the restriction about the number of
>> techniques?
>>>> We  
>>>>> could do that: "Each WCAG 2.0 Test Sample must be linked to
>> exactly
>>>> one 
>>>>> WCAG 2.0 technique or failure, unless a combination of
>> techniques
>>>> is 
>>>>> required to meet a success criterion."
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Christophe
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/tests/usingTCDL
>>>>> [2]
>>>> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20060801/
>>>>> Overview.html#navigation-mechanisms-mult-loc
>>>
>> -- 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>> Evangelos Vlachogiannis
>> Researcher - PhD. Candidate
>> Contact: http://www.syros.aegean.gr/users/evlach/contactme.php
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>
> 
> 

-- 
Shadi Abou-Zahra     Web Accessibility Specialist for Europe |
Chair & Staff Contact for the Evaluation and Repair Tools WG |
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)           http://www.w3.org/ |
Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI),   http://www.w3.org/WAI/ |
WAI-TIES Project,                http://www.w3.org/WAI/TIES/ |
Evaluation and Repair Tools WG,    http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/ |
2004, Route des Lucioles - 06560,  Sophia-Antipolis - France |
Voice: +33(0)4 92 38 50 64          Fax: +33(0)4 92 38 78 22 |
Received on Monday, 30 October 2006 20:25:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:33 GMT