W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > July to September 2001

Re: Criterion

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2001 21:41:23 -0400 (EDT)
To: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
cc: "GLWAI Guidelines WG (GL - WAI Guidelines WG)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0108042137260.29829-100000@tux.w3.org>
I agree that in some cases we describe things that are necessary but may not
be sufficient, and in other cases we may describe things that are sufficient
but may not be necessary.

"Success criteria" (in ATAG they are currently referred to as "minimum basic
functionality" and in UAAG "minimum requirements") should be describing
things that are necessary. Often when they are not they are what you have
called partial examples, and I agree that those should go into the
techniques. In many cases it is possible to think about what is being
expressed in terms of a more functional requirement, which is helpful.

Basically I think this is a good underpinnin gfor your review.

Cheers

Charles

On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:

  I have taken an action item to review the "Criteria for Success"  and
  "Examples" for the guidelines.

  Before doing this I thought I would establish what the criteria for the
  "Criteria for Success"  and "Examples" should be.

  Here is what I have so far:

  1)  if we have a "criteria for success" section then a person should be
  able to claim success if they meet the points listed.   That is -- if I
  do all the items then I can say I have succeeded.

  That in turn means that 'criteria for success" cannot be a partial list
  of things that would be good to do.   We should not have a list of 3
  items where doing them would not satisfy the guideline, - but would only
  partially satisfy it.    If we did that then they wouldn’t be criteria
  for success, they would just be required items.

  Let me summarize this point by saying -- that if we have a "criteria for
  success"  section under a guideline -- then the items listed must be
  SUFFICIENT for a person to assume (AND CLAIM) success or conformance.



  2) If we have a "criteria for success" section under a guideline, then
  all of the items must be REQUIRED  or REQUIRED AS QUALIFIED.   That is,
  each item must be required to be done in order to succeed or it must be
  required as qualified.  (e.g. If you have xxxx then you (must) do yyy).


  If this was not true then we would have things listed as 'criteria' for
  success that indeed are not needed -- and are not therefore criteria for
  success.     They may be ideas, or techniques, or strategies for
  achieving the guideline, but they are not themselves the 'criteria for
  success' since you can succeed without meeting them.

  Let me summarize this by saying that  --  if we have a "criteria for
  success" section under a guideline,  then the items must all be required
  for success (as qualified).

  NOTE:  it is possible for there to be a single item that is an "or"
  statement.  "e.g.   You must do xxxx or do yyy.


  3) Examples should be labeled as Sufficient Examples or Partial
  Examples.

  A Sufficient Example is an example where the guideline is met by the
  described action.   That is,  for that example, (as it is described)
  there is nothing else that needs to be done to meet the guideline.

  A Partial Example is an example of something that you could do that
  addresses the guideline, but there may also be other things that need to
  be done before the guideline would be met.

  I think that perhaps we should not have any partial examples in the
  guidelines, except perhaps in the rationale section, where they may be
  described in running text to help explain the guideline.    All other
  partial examples should go into the techniques doc -- since they are
  just ideas.

  I will rethink this idea again after I have gone through the doc and
  looked at things.  These are my thoughts now.


  4)  I don’t think that we will have "Success Criteria" for all the
  guidelines.   Some of them are focused enough or have other
  characteristics that the guideline itself is as good as we can do for
  "Success Criteria".   Anything else is either not necessary (e.g. there
  are several ways to do it)  or they are not sufficient  (e.g. there are
  things we can say, -  but we don’t have a full list of what you would
  need to do to succeed.  Thus we don’t have a list of criteria for
  success.

  When this occurs we could have examples or ideas or something but we
  should not have a list of things we call "Success Criteria" which are
  not necessary or are not sufficient to claim success.






  Your thoughts?  (pro or con)


  Gregg

  -- ------------------------------
  Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
  Professor - Human Factors
  Dept of Ind. Engr. - U of Wis.
  Director - Trace R & D Center
  Gv@trace.wisc.edu <mailto:Gv@trace.wisc.edu>, <http://trace.wisc.edu/>
  FAX 608/262-8848 
  For a list of our listserves send “lists” to listproc@trace.wisc.edu
  <mailto:listproc@trace.wisc.edu>





-- 
Charles McCathieNevile    http://www.w3.org/People/Charles  phone: +61 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative     http://www.w3.org/WAI    fax: +1 617 258 5999
Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia
(or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France)
Received on Saturday, 4 August 2001 21:41:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:11 GMT