W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-evaltf@w3.org > April 2012

Re: Templates and use cases

From: Elle <nethermind@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 11:37:21 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJ=fddPuMBBWiyzqGN5dSGu8xVZM-9J_ifJgee8KnbxL72U9HA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Detlev Fischer <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>
Cc: Eval TF <public-wai-evaltf@w3.org>

I think, as you mentioned later in your email with use cases, that
templates provide a good starting point. They are only part of the picture
for an evaluator, but they represent an efficient way to start the
evaluation process. Using templates and reporting on them as such allows an
evaluator to identify common elements needing correction in a way that
communicates well to the website owner.  It's how he or she already views
the site in question. As you say, it's not at all a replacement for
evaluating live content and its interaction within the template, but it
reduces the redundancy of page-level testing.

When we remediate our websites, we look first for common elements, often
templated elements. Then, we look on a page level basis. If, on the page
level analysis, we see that an interaction needs to change because of the
conflict with template and page components, we can decide whether to change
the template or the page content itself.  That's a decision that's harder
to make if we don't view these as separate items, I believe.


On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Detlev Fischer <
detlev.fischer@testkreis.de> wrote:

> Hi list,
> just two points that cam to mind after today's teleconference:
> (1) Templates
> The text now (in Step 2a)  talks about "The common web pages of the
> website and templates available to the evaluator"
> For templates that just cover a part of the web page (e.g. portlets), some
> aspects of conformance depend on their place in the context of the overall
> page - think of 1.3.1 and 2.4.1 (heading levels), 1.3.2 Meaningful
> Sequence, etc. I wonder what the evaluator will actually *do* with the
> templates provided by the commissioner - if they are empty or out of page
> context, a complete evaluation seems impossible or of doubtful value. But
> this may not be intended by the description - not sure. Many observations
> (potential fails) also result from interactions between template and
> content on a real page.
> I am not against taking stock of templates per se, just not sure what
> added value that would bring and how they would be assessed outside a
> normal page context. Thoughts?
> (2) Use cases
> In cases where evaluations of web applications are commissioned by
> clients, checking the use cases provided is certainly a good starting
> point. It's just important to also go beyond documented use cases,
> especially regarding error handling and unexpected user actions, to capture
> violations.
> --
> Detlev Fischer
> testkreis - das Accessibility-Team von feld.wald.wiese
> c/o feld.wald.wiese
> Borselstraße 3-7 (im Hof)
> 22765 Hamburg
> Tel   +49 (0)40 439 10 68-3
> Mobil +49 (0)1577 170 73 84
> Fax   +49 (0)40 439 10 68-5
> http://www.testkreis.de
> Beratung, Tests und Schulungen für barrierefreie Websites

If you want to build a ship, don't drum up the people to gather wood,
divide the work, and give orders. Instead, teach them to yearn for the vast
and endless sea.
- Antoine De Saint-Exupéry, The Little Prince
Received on Thursday, 19 April 2012 15:38:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:40:20 UTC