RE: [for review] updated draft AERT

Dear all,

I have not been able to review the whole document, yet I already have some
comments I detail below:

In general, I understand the point behind the split between sections 2.1
(capabilities) and 2.2 (configuration), yet I think there is still something
that "does not fit" well enough.

Some further detailed comments follow, sorry for the telegraphic writing (I
need to leave for a meeting):

Abstract:
- WCAG 2.0 are mentioned twice as the scope of accessibility evaluation.
However, later we say evaluation tools are a broader concept (which may
include any quality assurance tool).
- Among tool capabilities, I would suggest adding "specify" to "manage,
carry out and report the results" 

2.1 Test subjects and their environment
- These features do not help render (rendering) documents, but retrieve
(retrieval) them
- It seems all resources are retrieved via http, but they can e.g. be
retrieved from the local file system during development process.

2.1.1. Content Types
- Typo in markup document: "which can then parsed" should be "which can then
*be* parsed"
- In script resources, instead of "mobile web and web 2.0 applications",
better "rich Internet applications" (for consistency with WAI-ARIA).
- Multimedia resources: are they "present" in the document, or better
"embedded"? (or they can even be the document themselves).
- PDF documents: "are available" instead of "is available".

2.1.4 Dynamic content
- "Clicking with the mouse and swiping with the fingers on a touch-screen"
are not modality-independent events. I know they are mere examples, but I
would suggest mentioning a keyboard as well.

2.1.5 Content negotiation
- Change "a language version" to "a *specific* language version"

2.1.6 Cookies
- Clarify that the content served may depend on the value of the cookie sent
by the client within the request. (That is the reason why cookie support is
desirable) 

2.1.7 Authentication
- Typo: extra space within "sometimes"

2.19. Crawling
- Clarify the difference between "types of content-types extracted" and
point 2.1 Content types.
 - Join the three last list items
- Provide examples of inclusion and exclusion filters (e.g. depth level, URI
patterns)

2.2.1 Subject selection
- I understand the point: section 1 is about capabilities, section 2.1 is
about configurability. But then, why do "configuration capabilities" of
2.1.9 appear in section 2.1?

2.3.2 Persistence of results
- Persistence layer need not be a database (it can be e.g. local filesystem)
- Difference between 2.5.3 and 2.2.2?

2.5.3 Policy environments
- Clarify the difference with 2.2.2 Selection of evaluation tests (aren't we
selecting in 2.5.3 evaluation tests as well?)

Hear you later.

Regards,

Samuel.

-----Mensaje original-----
De: Shadi Abou-Zahra [mailto:shadi@w3.org] 
Enviado el: domingo, 16 de febrero de 2014 12:32
Para: ERT WG
Asunto: [for review] updated draft AERT

Dear Group,

The latest draft of AERT (working title) for review is here:
  - http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/WD-AERT/ED-AERT

Please send comments for discussion to the list!

Regards,
   Shadi

--
Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/ Activity Lead, W3C/WAI
International Program Office Evaluation and Repair Tools Working Group (ERT
WG) Research and Development Working Group (RDWG)

Received on Wednesday, 19 February 2014 10:58:21 UTC