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

AW: AW: Discussion 5.5

From: Kerstin Probiesch <k.probiesch@googlemail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 23:01:34 +0100
To: "'Velleman, Eric'" <evelleman@bartimeus.nl>, "'Detlev Fischer'" <fischer@dias.de>
Cc: <public-wai-evaltf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <4f189296.84310e0a.3f7d.ffff830c@mx.google.com>
Hi Eric,

probably we should collect all possible errors and discuss how to prevent
them?

Best

Kerstin 

 

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Velleman, Eric [mailto:evelleman@bartimeus.nl]
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 19. Januar 2012 22:44
> An: Detlev Fischer; Kerstin Probiesch
> Cc: public-wai-evaltf@w3.org
> Betreff: RE: AW: Discussion 5.5
> 
> Hi Kerstin, Detlev,
> 
> This is also an interesting margin of error.
> The evaluator making mistakes.
> This is an interesting thing to look at when we talk about
> replicability. This would indicate that there is a margin of error from
> the evaluators that influences replicability depending on the size of
> the sample. Wiki indicates that it decreases with a larger sample.
> 
> Do we accept errors by evaluators?
> Kindest regards,
> 
> Eric
> 
> ________________________________________
> Van: Detlev Fischer [fischer@dias.de]
> Verzonden: donderdag 19 januari 2012 22:29
> Aan: Kerstin Probiesch
> CC: public-wai-evaltf@w3.org
> Onderwerp: Re: AW: Discussion 5.5
> 
> Hi Kerstin,
> 
> Whoops, I may have been on the wrong track. I guess what you refer to
> describes uncertainty in *attestation*: evaluator's errors, omissions,
> or misjudgements, not error = the pin-downable flaws that we find in
> evaluating web sites. So maybe 'error' is best used exclusively as a
> term to describe variance in the evaluation process? But then, wasn't
> the term "margin of error" used in the context of marginal flaws that
> might be acknowledged without preventing the attestation of
> conformance? Not sure anymore, it's too late - must go back to the
> discussion...
> 
> Regards,
> Detlev
> 
> 
> 
> it just describes  Quoting Kerstin Probiesch
> <k.probiesch@googlemail.com>:
> 
> > Hi Detlev,
> >
> > "error margin" or "margin of error" is a term used in Test
> Development. Some
> > hints here:
> > http://www.linguee.com/english-
> german?query=margin+of+error&source=english.
> > Some further explanations here:
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margin_of_error.
> >
> > Regs
> >
> > Kerstin
> >
> >> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> >> Von: Detlev Fischer [mailto:fischer@dias.de]
> >> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 19. Januar 2012 21:16
> >> An: public-wai-evaltf@w3.org
> >> Betreff: RE: Discussion 5.5
> >>
> >> Hi Tim,
> >>
> >> English isn't my first language, but doesn't 'error' indicate that
> >> someone basically knew how to do something and erred (not always the
> >> case with the problems we encounter)? Maybe 'flaw' is the more
> >> accurate term? 'Failure instance' sounds pretty stilted and may
> easily
> >> get mixed up with (WCAG) Failures.
> >>
> >> Mhm..(scratching head)...mhm.
> >>
> >> Quoting "Boland Jr, Frederick E." <frederick.boland@nist.gov>:
> >>
> >> > According to some references I recently accessed, criticality
> >> > implies that the evaluation cannot continue until the problem has
> >> > been resolved, whereas non-criticality implies that the evaluation
> >> > may proceed with the problem noted.
> >> >
> >> > A definition of "error" (from
> >> > http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/error?s=t
> >> > ) "a deviation from accuracy or correctness"
> >> > -which would seem to apply to "barrier" as well?
> >> >
> >> > A definition of "barrier" (from
> >> > http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/barrier?s=t
> >> > ) "anything built or serving to bar passage"
> >> > -which would seem to imply criticality as mentioned previously
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > -----
> >> >
> >> > In many cases, distinguishing between critical and non-critical is
> >> easy.
> >> > A keyboard trap or a lightbox dialogue that pops up without screen
> >> > reader users becoming aware of it is a critical violation. A
> >> graphical
> >> > navigation element without alt text is one as well. But a few
> missing
> >> > paragraphs or list tags in editorial content are probably non-
> >> critical.
> >> > However, there will be a grey area where the distinction is not so
> >> easy.
> >> > But that, in my view, should not lead to the conclusion that the
> >> > distinction cannot or must not be made.
> >> >
> >> > Not sure about terms, though. Is 'error' a good term for non-
> critical
> >> > violations and 'barrier' a good term for critical violations?
> >> >
> >> > Detlev
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> >> 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
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> 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 Thursday, 19 January 2012 22:01:27 GMT

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