Re: Following properly documented existing procedures - A hypothetical question?

Hi Alistair, Detlev,

Please find some thoughts on different parts of the thread, sorry if 
they are quoted out of context. Here is the link to the full thread:
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-evaltf/2013Nov/0020


On 18.11.2013 17:54, Alistair Garrison wrote:
> My question is this - "Am I honour bound to follow the procedure they have documented?"

Depends on what you want to do. Do you want to validate that what they 
said is correct versus the approach that they are following is correct.


> The thought in my head is yes - that I should follow their procedure if it is properly documented.  I would of course check all relevant failure conditions, but if I didn't follow their procedure and started to test the page using tests from sufficient techniques I've chosen (which have not been used to develop the web content) I might find a failure or two - just because they have done things differently.

Ideally different procedures would not diverge. If they do then:

#1. One or both procedures are incorrect interpretations of WCAG 2.0 
Success Criteria;

AND/OR

#2. The guidance around WCAG 2.0 Success Criteria for which the two 
procedures diverge is too vague;

Feedback on #2 should be made to the WCAG WG so that they can improve 
their guidance; for example in "Understanding WCAG 2.0" documentation.


On 18.11.2013 21:23, Detlev Fischer wrote:
> Take the headings techniques G141 and H42 (http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG-TECHS/G141.html and http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG-TECHS/H42.html). While you may think it is clearly implied here that headings should be used to reflect the hierarchy, checks in both techniques refrain from requing correct nesting, and F2 has a somewhat ambiguous check ("Check that the proper semantic structure (e.g., HTML headings) is used with the text to convey the information") which can be interpreted both ways (A) just check headings are marked up with h1-h6 regardless of flawless hierarchy, or (B) checking any heading mark-up in the context of the overall structure (including content headed).

Correct, there is no requirement for *nested headings* but there are 
requirements on *reflecting the structure* (which may or may not be 
hierarchical). Also Success Criterion 1.3.2 is relevant here.

So, I really don't see how you could come to interpretation (A) even 
when you only consider Success Criterion 1.3.1. It requires that all 
"information, structure, and relationships" are made programmatically 
determinable. With checking for (A) you only check "information" but 
omit "structure" and "relationships" from the same Success Criteria.

What am I missing here?

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)

Received on Tuesday, 19 November 2013 13:03:41 UTC