W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2004

RE: Revised statement on testability (was" Definition of human te stability)

From: Gian Sampson-Wild (PurpleTop) <gian@purpletop.com.au>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 19:15:55 +1000
To: "'Michael Cooper'" <michaelc@watchfire.com>, "'John M Slatin'" <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00c501c43801$bc452f70$92a0ddcb@ptop>
<from Michael Cooper>
Therefore I think we need a requirement for ourselves that our
testability assertions themselves be tested prior to finalization of the
guidelines. We need to obtain comprehensive sets of test cases for each
guideline, subject them to human testing, and measure the inter-rater
reliability. If the measurement meets a threshold we set, we define the
guideline as testable, otherwise we define it as untestable and take
action from there (e.g., change or remove the guideline).
Completely agree. This way we can define those guidelines that are
untestable and determine whether it is actually *possible* to test them.
I still don't think it is viable to remove a guideline *just because* it
is not testable. 
Received on Wednesday, 12 May 2004 05:18:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:49 UTC