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

RE: Comment #24 - Evaluating Templates with no content

From: Sarah Swierenga <sswieren@msu.edu>
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 10:39:18 -0400
To: "'Shadi Abou-Zahra'" <shadi@w3.org>, "'Vivienne CONWAY'" <v.conway@ecu.edu.au>
Cc: "'Eval TF'" <public-wai-evaltf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <007b01cd8073$e9a60b60$bcf22220$@edu>
Hello again,
I'm not sure how evaluating templates would fall outside of the scope of the
methodology. If a website uses templates, all of them should be evaluated,
since they are (or will be) core to the website functionality. It is
important for developers to know that the templates they are creating need
to designed with the accessibility standards in mind.

-----Original Message-----
From: Shadi Abou-Zahra [mailto:shadi@w3.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 8:30 AM
To: Vivienne CONWAY
Cc: Eval TF
Subject: Re: Comment #24 - Evaluating Templates with no content

Hi Vivienne,

I agree that this particular type of evaluation is outside the scope of the
methodology (as we have defined it). The question is, what is the role of
evaluating *templates* (the empty shells) for post-development conformance

Long ago when I was actively involved in evaluation, I recall spotting a
potential issue in some of the templates that were infrequently used on a
particular website. It would have taken me ages to find instances of pages
with the particular problems but because I knew the templates and the way
the content was generated, I knew the patterns to look for.

Did just make my life easier (= should be an advice to evaluators in the
methodology), or was it actually necessary to maximize confidence in my
evaluation (= should be a requirement in the methodology)?


On 22.8.2012 13:55, Vivienne CONWAY wrote:
> Hi all
> I thought I'd try to address some ideas about templates with no content.
> In comment #24, Detlev mentioned that he "did not see how one woudl
evaluate the template on its own, instead of a particular instance with all
content rendered as web page."
> I've just been asked to evaluate a set of templates before they have
content added so that the developer can check the accessibility of them
before content is added and might have to be removed again for a re-do of
the page.  This does happen quite a lot, and we are also asked to have our
user testers look at sets of templates before content is added as well.
> I think that as we're continually advocating that accessibility should
involved early in the development of websites, and then at every stage of
the life cycle of the website, we should see this as a good thing.  A
developer designs a template for the client, and then makes sure that this
template is accessible.
> My only concern is that this may not really relate to the methodology as
we're talking about complete websites, and not single pages or templates.
However, we are pitching the methodology as being relevant for developers
etc. also.  Any thoughts?
> Regards
> Vivienne L. Conway, B.IT(Hons), MACS CT, AALIA(cs) PhD Candidate & 
> Sessional Lecturer, Edith Cowan University, Perth, W.A.
> Director, Web Key IT Pty Ltd.
> v.conway@ecu.edu.au
> v.conway@webkeyit.com
> Mob: 0415 383 673
> This email is confidential and intended only for the use of the individual
or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this email is
strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify
me immediately by return email or telephone and destroy the original
> ________________________________________
> From: Shadi Abou-Zahra [shadi@w3.org]
> Sent: Monday, 20 August 2012 6:34 PM
> To: Eval TF
> Cc: Eric Velleman
> Subject: [important] closed and open comments with actions
> Dear Eval TF,
> As a recap, please see the following actions for this week:
> # Comments from Public Review (WD 27 March)
>    - <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments>
>    - There were no comments on this disposition of comments from Eval 
> TF in the survey of 7 August 2012; All comments have been closed now.
>    - *ACTION:* Let us know immediately if you have objections.
> # Comments from Eval TF Review (ED 30 July)
>    - <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments-20120730>
>    - Proposed resolutions available are for your review for all 
> comments except #24, #29, and #30, and an on-going discussion on comment
>    - *ACTION:* Review this disposition of comments by _today_.
> # Comments from WCAG WG Review (ED 30 July)
>    - <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-evaltf/2012Aug/0034>
>    - Editors working on proposed resolutions for these comments; let 
> us know any comments or thoughts you may have on it as well.
>    - *ACTION:* Read the WCAG WG comments before the next call.
> 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)
> This e-mail is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient you
must not disclose or use the information contained within. If you have
received it in error please return it to the sender via reply e-mail and
delete any record of it from your system. The information contained within
is not the opinion of Edith Cowan University in general and the University
accepts no liability for the accuracy of the information provided.

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, 22 August 2012 14:39:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:40:22 UTC