RE: Review of new version methodology

HI again all
I had a bit more time before our meeting so thought I'd continue with the proof-reading:

Step 1: first paragraph
Sentence 1 - delete the 'to be evaluated' as it is implied.
Sentence 2 - "Carrying out initial cursory checks during this state assists in the identification of web pages that are relevant for later detailed evaluation."

2nd paragraph - change 'for' to 'In'

Step 2a: the second sentence seems a bit redundant.
last sentence in paragraph" change to "This step also provides an understanding of key aspects of the website, such as the ..."

Step 3b - first paragraph under the requirement 3b:
"from the variety of web pages... select at least two distinct web pages each with the following features (where applicable).

Question regarding the note at the end of 3B:  Did we decide that the 'majority of  web pages' should be freshly selected - I thought we were talking about 20% fresh pages, but I could be mistaken here

That's all I can see on a quick read, hope it's a help Eric.


Regards

Vivienne L. Conway, B.IT(Hons), MACS CT
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 message.
________________________________________
From: Vivienne CONWAY [v.conway@ecu.edu.au]
Sent: Thursday, 8 March 2012 11:10 PM
To: Velleman, Eric; public-wai-evaltf@w3.org
Subject: RE: Review of new version methodology

HI all

I've been going through the new document and note the following in Section 3:

Step 1: requirement 1 - type - should be 'the', not 'he'
paragraph under requirement 1: grammar needs changing for the last sentence 'of what the evaluation should cover'

Detailed review: need to rephrase 2nd sentence "this includes counts of the...".
next sentence: change 'statics' for 'statistics'

Step 1c: requirement 1c : grammar - "evaluate for shall be defined" change to "Define the target WCAG 2.0 conformance level ("A", "AA", or "AAA").

The next sentence should be changed in the same way as above - don't end the sentence with 'for'.

Next sentence: ',' after AAA, - whole paragraph could be re-worded for the grammar.

Step 1d - requirement 1d - sorry grammar again

Sorry, better stop here.


Regards

Vivienne L. Conway, B.IT(Hons), MACS CT
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 message.
________________________________________
From: Velleman, Eric [evelleman@bartimeus.nl]
Sent: Thursday, 8 March 2012 7:55 AM
To: public-wai-evaltf@w3.org
Subject: Review of new version methodology

Dear Taskforce,

As you see a lot of changes have been made to the new version of the document.
Please review sections 2.1 and section 3:

<http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20120306.html>

Please share with us your opinion on the following points to start with:

1. Your general impression of this version
2. Name change to: Web Accessibility Conformance Evaluation Methodology.
3. Is the scope of applicability well covered?
4. Are the steps in section 3 a good approach. Do we need more steps, more detail...

Hope to speak to you all on the call.
Kindest regards,

Eric

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.

CRICOS IPC 00279B

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.

CRICOS IPC 00279B

Received on Thursday, 8 March 2012 14:37:54 UTC