W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-evaltf@w3.org > September 2011

AW: Fwd: Additional Point/Question: problem centered / page centered evaluation

From: Kerstin Probiesch <k.probiesch@googlemail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 20:17:57 +0200
To: "'Detlev Fischer'" <fischer@dias.de>, <public-wai-evaltf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <4e67b540.4a600e0a.793b.6659@mx.google.com>
Hi Detlev, TF,

as we haven't discusses the important points in this mail on that Thursday I
suggest to discuss the first six points in separate e-mail threads to avoid
confusion with the discussion on problem centered / page centered.

Regards

Kerstin


> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: public-wai-evaltf-request@w3.org [mailto:public-wai-evaltf-
> request@w3.org] Im Auftrag von Detlev Fischer
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 31. August 2011 09:58
> An: public-wai-evaltf@w3.org
> Betreff: Re: Fwd: Additional Point/Question: problem centered / page
> centered evaluation
> 
> Am 30.08.2011 11:05, schrieb Shadi Abou-Zahra:
> 
> Here a few issues we might discuss on Thursday regarding requirements.
> I
> promise to be brief this time!  :-)
> 
> (1) Do we agree that we need a way to flag as *critical* particular
> instances in the test case (the pages under evaluation), meaning that a
> critical failure (e.g., a keyboard trap) fails the page / site?
> regardless of the quality of the rest of atomic SC tests?
> 
> (2) Do we agree that tests should be documented in principle and
> whenever possible (both page tested and related test results) so that
> the results can be checked and verified independently?
> 
> (3) Since "TECHNIQUES ARE NEVER REQUIRED IN ORDER TO MEET WCAG" (quote
> WCAG Myths text) and "The only thing .. is to meet the success criteria
> and conformance requirements.." -- is it meaningful to derive atoms of
> testing from the techniques?
> 
> (4) Are failures a firmer starting point (at least if a failure occurs,
> the SC is not met)? Some consider failures informative, others see more
> in them. WCAG seem a bit vague as to their status.
> 
> (5) Can we agree that a score of just TRUE or FALSE per SC and
> particular page is insufficient / too coarse / not helpful for
> customers
> we want to act as a result of the test?
> 
> (6) Can we agree that especially negative results per SC and page
> should
> be commented meaningfully so the rationale for the judgement is laid
> open for others to understand (or contest)?
> 
> (7) As to "page-centred or not", we experience the problems of a
> page-centric approach in many of our tests, especially with dynamic
> sites, but it also has advantages (eg., having the page URI allows
> linking comment and the instance tested). Documenting a compex series
> of
> HttpRequests may get too complex? What are the alternatives? We should
> discuss that.
> 
> Detlev
> 
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: Additional Point/Question: problem centered / page centered
> > evaluation
> > Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 08:21:34 +0000
> > From: Kerstin Probiesch <mail@barrierefreie-informationskultur.de>
> > To: <public-wai-evaltf@w3.org>
> >
> > Dear Eval TF,
> >
> > I want to add the following question: should we recommend a problem
> > centered
> > or a page centered approach? In my opinion this question is not only
> > essential for further discussions about single questions and topics
> > (true/false, rankings, involve people with disabilities) but
> essential for
> > the whole methodology.
> >
> > Regs
> >
> > Kerstin
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------
> > Kerstin Probiesch - Freie Beraterin
> > Barrierefreiheit, Social Media, Webkompetenz
> > Kantstraße 10/19 | 35039 Marburg
> > Tel.: 06421 167002
> > E-Mail: mail@barrierefreie-informationskultur.de
> > Web: http://www.barrierefreie-informationskultur.de
> >
> > XING: http://www.xing.com/profile/Kerstin_Probiesch
> > Twitter: http://twitter.com/kprobiesch
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> Detlev Fischer PhD
> DIAS GmbH - Daten, Informationssysteme und Analysen im Sozialen
> Geschäftsführung: Thomas Lilienthal, Michael Zapp
> 
> Telefon: +49-40-43 18 75-25
> Mobile: +49-157 7-170 73 84
> Fax: +49-40-43 18 75-19
> E-Mail: fischer@dias.de
> 
> Anschrift: Schulterblatt 36, D-20357 Hamburg
> Amtsgericht Hamburg HRB 58 167
> Geschäftsführer: Thomas Lilienthal, Michael Zapp
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 7 September 2011 18:18:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:52:11 GMT