Re: [for review] ACT Review Process

> I think these test cases may become very useful when related test rules 
> are contributed. Do you plan to make this fully public at a later time?

Yes. The COMPARE repository will be read-only for the general public and
read/write for experts/testers (I repeat my invitation to get signed up right
now!)

--
Detlev Fischer
testkreis c/o feld.wald.wiese
Thedestr. 2, 22767 Hamburg

Mobil +49 (0)157 57 57 57 45
Fax +49 (0)40 439 10 68-5

http://www.testkreis.de
Beratung, Tests und Schulungen für barrierefreie Websites

Shadi Abou-Zahra schrieb am 22.06.2017 14:40:

> Hi Detlev,
> 
> On 20/06/2017 11:00, Detlev Fischer wrote:
>> Hi Shadi, ACT TF
>> I had a look at the review Process document. The basic problem for me is to
>> understand how the process (submission of a rule backed by supporting test
>> cases) would work in practice, so I would think it is worthwhile taking one or
>> a few non-trivial examples of real web content and looking what the rule(s)
>> might look like that would be supportive when deciding about conformance. THis
>> exercise would show the uninitiated how it's going to play out.
> 
> Agree. I believe sample rules that comply with the current Rules Format 
> specification are being developed. We can also use them for trying out 
> and refining this review process.
> 
> 
>> A complex and at the same time very frequent example might be something like
>> drop-down navigation menus (take for example a recent discussion between Matt
>> King and Mallory on the Webaim list - the tail end is here
>> http://webaim.org/discussion/mail_message?id=34968 )
>> 
>> What would rules look like that help me establish whether some menu conforms
>> to 1.3.1, 2.1.1, 4.1.2, 2.4.3 etc? How can the rule be isolated from content
>> aspects that may co-determine whether we think of some solution as acceptable
>> or not (take the length of the submenus in cases where they are opened
>> automaticlly when focused)? When does the aria menu pattern apply, and what
>> deviations of the pattern are OK (conform) in what contexts?
>> 
>> We all know the difficulty of attributing an issue to the right SC - when an
>> element does not get tab focus but you CAN activate it when arrowing there,
>> does it violate 2.1.1? Or only 2.4.3? If a main menu item opens the submenu
>> and a second activation does not close it but goes to a section page, is that
>> a usability issue or necessarily a fail of some SC? Etc, etc...
>> 
>> So I believe working through a few practical real world implementations and
>> showing how the ACT framework would support developers / testers in assessing
>> real-world implementations would really help making the ACT activity a lot
>> more tangible (it often feels quite abstract to me).
> 
> Agree. Though this is slightly orthogonal to the review process itself.
> 
> 
>> Finally, an invitation: ACT TF members wanting a test login to our COMPARE
>> repository ( http://www.funka.com/en/projekt/compare/ ) are welcome - just
>> give me a shout. The repository is early days, not yet in its final shape, and
>> not yet public but it already has a few real world cases with accessiblility
>> ratings. Should you want to add your rating, the comment field would give
>> scope to outline the rules according to which someone has arrived at a PASS or
>> FAIL conclusion. As a contributor of ratings you will be picking the SC (or
>> multiple SCs) that you think should fail (or pass with comment).
> 
> I think these test cases may become very useful when related test rules 
> are contributed. Do you plan to make this fully public at a later time?
> 
> Best,
>   Shadi
> 
> 
>> Best,
>> Detlev
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Detlev Fischer
>> testkreis c/o feld.wald.wiese
>> Thedestr. 2, 22767 Hamburg
>> 
>> Mobil +49 (0)157 57 57 57 45
>> Fax +49 (0)40 439 10 68-5
>> 
>> http://www.testkreis.de
>> Beratung, Tests und Schulungen für barrierefreie Websites
>> 
>> Shadi Abou-Zahra schrieb am 19.06.2017 19:54:
>> 
>>> Dear ACT TF,
>>>
>>> Ref:
>>> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/conformance-testing/wiki/ACT_Review_Process
>>>
>>> As discussed during the call today, please review the outline for the
>>> proposed ACT Review Process. Feel free to add your feedback to the wiki
>>> discussion tab or by email.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>    Shadi
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/
>>> Accessibility Strategy and Technology Specialist
>>> Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
>>> World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
>>>
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/
> Accessibility Strategy and Technology Specialist
> Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
> World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
>

Received on Thursday, 22 June 2017 14:47:38 UTC