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 19:30:20 +0100
Message-ID: <20120208193020.11945bozwoq11fss@webmail.dias.de>
To: public-wai-evaltf@w3.org
I think any full evaluation would have to include the full set of SC  
for a conformance claim, but it is still useful to be able to deploy a  
suitable subset, for example, to evaluate the output of a particular  
portlet. The definition of the subset would be down to the  
organization doing the testing. Such a portlet test would be no more  
than a building block towards a final full evaluation (or may serve  
its purpose outside the context of a full WCAG conformance claim). At  
least that's the way I see it...

Regards,
Detlev


  to Quoting Elle <nethermind@gmail.com>:

> Detlev:
>
> Does this mean we would theoretically have a full set and a sub set for the
> methodology?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Elle
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Detlev Fischer <fischer@dias.de> wrote:
>
>> 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<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/<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/<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
>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 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
>



--
---------------------------------------------------------------
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 18:33:43 GMT

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