W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-ert@w3.org > March 2007

Re: Editor's draft comments

From: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 19:53:30 +0100
Message-ID: <45F844AA.4000307@w3.org>
To: Johannes Koch <johannes.koch@fit.fraunhofer.de>
Cc: public-wai-ert@w3.org

Johannes Koch wrote:
> 
> Shadi Abou-Zahra schrieb:
>>
>> Johannes Koch wrote:
>>> Let me present two approaches for the same scenario:
>>>
>>> 1.
>>> a) Tool finds table with structural elements.
>>> b) Human decides whether table is layout table.
>>>
>>> 2.
>>> a) Tool finds table.
>>> b) Human decides whether table is layout table.
>>> c) Tool finds structural elements in layout table.
>>>
>>> Is one of them semiauto?
>>
>> What is the test in each of these?
> 
> Check for structural elements within a layout table.

Scenario 2 is semiauto (see mail from Charles which elaborates on this 
use case). Scenario 1 seems incomplete. If the human decides that a 
table is a layout table AND therefore the test is a fail, then it is 
actually a manual (for example the tool is a browser toolbar). If the 
tool merely asks the human "is this a layout table" and uses this input 
to decide the outcome of the test, then it is semiauto.

So the question is not the series of atomic steps or tests but how the 
overall decision is made.

Regards,
   Shadi


-- 
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 Wednesday, 14 March 2007 18:53:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:28 GMT