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

Re: proposed definition for "website"

From: Detlev Fischer <fischer@dias.de>
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:15:30 +0100
Message-ID: <20120208181530.185631x9b0d6eroy@webmail.dias.de>
To: public-wai-evaltf@w3.org
Hi Don, hi list,

I agree that the evaluation of portlets is an important use case. It  
raises the issue to what extent the methodology would support an  
evaluation based on a subset of WCAG success criteria.

Just to be clear: I think a proper conformance statement can only be  
made on the level of the full web page. The testing of a number of  
success criteria depends not only on the assessment of the full page  
(as for most SC within principle 2: Operable), but beyond that, on the  
page *context*, as in 2.4.5 Multiple Ways, 3.2.3 Consistent  
Navigation, and 3.2.4 Consistent Identification. And some success  
criteria (or subsets thereof, such as 1.3.1: headings) may or may not  
apply on the level of portlet-generated code fragment, depending on  
the approach. For example, in an HTML 5 context, the headings  
hierarchy may be generated from the nesting of fragments so having all  
portals use h1 might be fine.

Having said that, it is clearly useful to be able to evaluate portlets  
or other code framents (whatever way they are generated) with an  
applicable subset of WCAG Success Criteria. This would give  
organizations a means to measure the degree of conformance on a unit  
level long before a final conformance claim or test. The full  
conformance statement would then only be made on the level of the  
portal page.

How much of the methodology is actually useful for a selective  
evaluation based on a subset of WCAG success criteria needs to be  
carefully looked at.

Regards,
Detlev


e.g. Quoting Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>:

> Hi Don,
>
> I would say that this depends on what the scope of the evaluation  
> is, which needs to be clearly stated in the conformance  
> statement/report.
>
> It could make sense to have each portlet evaluated separately,  
> though this would not include the main portal entry page and  
> similarly pages that belong to the portal but are not specific to  
> individual portals.
>
> Actually, I think this is an important use-case for us to consider.
>
> Best,
>   Shadi
>
>
> On 3.2.2012 17:40, Don Raikes wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> Maybe I have missed a  discussion of this topic since I just joined  
>> the group, but what about a portal-style site?
>>
>> What if one or more portlets on the site are accessible, but the  
>> container portal page has some accessibility issues how do we  
>> handle this?  Also what about the fact that some portlets are  
>> accessible and others are not? Do we consider each portlet a  
>> website since it is a self-contained web application?
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Shadi Abou-Zahra [mailto:shadi@w3.org]
>> Sent: Friday, February 03, 2012 4:38 AM
>> To: Eval TF
>> Subject: proposed definition for "website"
>>
>> Dear Eval TF,
>>
>> Yesterday I took an action to propose a new definition for  
>> "website" *in the context of this document*. Currently the document  
>> says:
>>
>> [[ http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/methodology/#website
>> Website - A coherent collection of one or more related web pages  
>> that together provide common use or functionality. It includes  
>> static web pages, dynamically generated web pages, and web  
>> applications.
>> ]]
>>
>>
>> I propose we add the following text to this definition:
>>
>> [[
>> Websites are generally self-enclosed entities with key resources  
>> such as a homepage, login page, or other entry pages; help pages;  
>> sitemap; and contact information. Web pages within a website  
>> typically have a common design ("look and feel") and navigational  
>> structures. Examples of websites in the context of this document  
>> include:
>>   - Self-enclosed web appearances owned or provided by organizations;
>>   - Self-enclosed sections of websites (sometimes referred to as  
>> "sub-sites"), such as these of departments within organizations;
>>   - Self-enclosed web applications and other web-based products.
>>
>> Arbitrary selections of individual web pages, especially those that  
>> do not include complete processes, are not regarded as websites.
>>
>> Note: Selections of individual web pages that are not regarded as  
>> websites may claim conformance to WCAG, but the evaluation of such  
>> collections is outside the scope of this methodology.
>> ]]
>>
>>
>> Looking forward to your reactions!
>>
>> Best,
>>    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)
>>
>>
>>
>
> -- 
> 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)
>
>



--
---------------------------------------------------------------
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, 8 February 2012 17:18:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:52:13 GMT