W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > October to December 2006

RE: definition of "testability"?

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2006 10:04:28 -0600
To: "'Tim Boland'" <frederick.boland@nist.gov>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <008901c71a19$6074cb40$c117a8c0@NC84301>

Yes

The sentence was based on the QA definition per your suggestion at the face
to face.   We avoided the 'truth value' phrase since it pretty high reading
level and might need to be defined itself.  (Might even be philosophical in
nature.)    


Gregg
 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Tim Boland
> Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 3:36 PM
> To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> Subject: definition of "testability"?
> 
> 
> Regarding the WCAG2.0 conformance proposal [1], do we want to 
> have a definition for "testability/testable" included in the 
> Glossary?  If so, a possible candidate might be the 
> definition of "testability" found in the Quality Assurance 
> Specification Guidelines [2], as in "testability - a 
> proposition is testable if there is such a
>   procedure that assesses the truth-value of a proposition 
> with a high confidence level."
> 
> Thanks and best wishes
> Tim Boland NIST
> 
> PS - "high confidence level" is used at the end of that 
> paragraph, so that mention may be enough..  Apologies if 
> there already is a definition of "testability" in place..
> 
> 
> 
> [1]: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2006/11/conformance-revs.html 
> [2]: http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/#glossary
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 7 December 2006 16:04:45 GMT

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