W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > January to March 2015

Re: Fifth Draft of UAAG Exit Criteria (with WG edits)

From: Jeanne Spellman <jeanne@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 15:39:11 -0400
Message-ID: <5501EB5F.8020407@w3.org>
To: UAWG <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>

  Exit Criteria
The User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group intends to submit 
this document for consideration as a W3C Proposed Recommendation as soon 
as the following conditions are met. We expect to complete testing and 
show evidence of meeting all exit criteria, and change or remove the 
at-risk items as needed, no earlier than @@[date]@@.
1. Define test cases: Update the set of tests needed to cover all UAAG 
normative success criteria.
2. Test Implementations: Perform these tests and verify at least two 
results on user agents, and to the extent needed, combinations of user 
agents and extensions.



On 2/26/2015 2:32 PM, Jeanne Spellman wrote:
> Here is the Fourth Draft of the Exit Criteria as revised by UAWG during
> the meeting of 26 February 2015. Still more work to do.  We will talk to
> browser people at CSUN and see if we can figure out the technical
> details of separating out the rendering engine and the browser UI.
>
> ------------------------
>
> Exit Criteria
> The User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group intends to submit
> this document for consideration as a W3C Proposed Recommendation as soon
> as the following conditions are met. We expect to complete testing and
> show evidence of meeting all exit criteria, and change or remove the
> at-risk items as needed, no earlier than @@[date]@@.
>
> 1. Define test cases: Update the set of tests needed to cover all UAAG
> normative success criteria.
>
> 2. Test Implementations: Perform these tests and verify at least two
> independent results on user agents, and to the extent needed,
> combinations of user agents and extensions.
>
> Note on Independent Implementations:
> In order to be considered independent, each implementation (e.g.
> rendering engine, user agent, plugin, or extension) of a success
> criterion must be developed by a different party and cannot share,
> reuse, or derive from code used by another qualifying implementation.
> Sections of code that have no bearing on the implementation of the
> success criterion would be exempt from this requirement.
>
> a) Success criteria that are implemented at the rendering engine level
> must be demonstrated by browsers that use different rendering engines.
> b) For success criteria that are only implemented at the user interface
> level (e.g. something set by a user), independent results can be
> demonstrated by browsers that share a common rendering engine. Examples
> include:
> 1.8.3 Provide Viewport Scrollbars
> 1.8.13 Allow Same User Interface
>
> c) Success criteria can be demonstrated by two independent extensions to
> the same or different user agents, by a combination of an extension and
> a native feature in the same or different user agent, or by native
> features in two different user agents.
> Example: A browser has a built-in feature that allows direct navigation
> to links, thus complying with 2.3.1. If an extension provides a
> different, perhaps more feature-rich method of doing the same thing,
> that can count as a second qualifying implementation even if it is for
> the same browser.
>
> NOTE: <Greg> I don't think we have consensus on whether Chrome and Opera
> (or IE and Tencen's) would count as independent implementations for an
> SC that is implemented in their shared rendering engine but adjusted
> through their different UIs.
>
> On 2/19/2015 3:12 PM, Jeanne Spellman wrote:
>> Here is the Third Draft of the Exit Criteria as revised by UAWG during
>> the meeting of 19 February 2015. It is not complete, and will be
>> continued at the 26 February meeting, but I didn't want to chance losing
>> the edits we made.
>>
>> Exit Criteria
>> The User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group intends to submit
>> this document for consideration as a W3C Proposed Recommendation as soon
>> as the following conditions are met. We expect to complete testing and
>> show evidence of meeting all exit criteria, and change or remove the
>> at-risk items as needed, no earlier than @@[date]@@.
>>
>> 1. Define test cases: Update the set of tests needed to cover all UAAG
>> normative success criteria.
>>
>> 2. Test Implementations: Perform these tests and verify at least two
>> independent results on user agents, and to the extent needed,
>> combinations of user agents and extensions.
>>
>> Note on Independent Implementations:
>> The goal is to have independent implementations for each success
>> criteria, while taking into account that other software components that
>> are not connected to the success criteria being tested may be shared.
>>
>> a) Success criteria that are implemented at the rendering engine level
>> must be demonstrated by browsers that use different rendering engines.
>> Examples include:
>> 1.1.2 Indicate Unrendered Alternative Content
>> 1.8.6 Maintain Point of Regard
>>
>> b) For success criteria that are only implemented at the user interface
>> level (e.g. something set by a user), independent results can be
>> demonstrated by browsers that share a common rendering engine. Examples
>> include:
>> 1.8.3 Provide Viewport Scrollbars
>> 1.8.13 Allow Same User Interface
>>
>> c) Success criteria that are implemented by extensions can be
>> demonstrated by two independent extensions to the same user agent.
>>
>> -----------------------
>>
>> d) Implementations features that satisfy a specific success criteria
>> (plugins, extensions or user agents) must be from  different code bases
>> in order to be considered independent.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2/6/2015 6:43 PM, Jeanne Spellman wrote:
>>> UAWG WG,
>>>
>>> Since getting Exit Criteria approved is a long process, I'm getting it
>>> started.
>>>
>>> Exit Criteria are used by the W3C Director (or designate) to show that
>>> the spec deserves to advance to the next stage of the W3C process. It is
>>> used to show that the spec works in the real world by showing that each
>>> feature is implemented in 2 independent products. Good exit criteria
>>> tell a convincing story that the spec is mature, complete and widely
>>> implemented.
>>>
>>> I expect that a tricky issue for us will be determining what are
>>> independent products when many products share the same rendering engine.
>>>
>>> Here are some sample Exit Criteria:
>>>
>>> ATAG: http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/CR-ATAG20-20131107/#exit
>>> WCAG: http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/CR-WCAG20-20080430/#status_exit
>>> ARIA: http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/CR-wai-aria-20110118/#sotd_exit
>>>
>>> Note that all of these include Features At Risk, so we need to finish up
>>> identifying all the implementations we have of each success criteria.
>>>
>>> Here's a proposal for a first draft of the Exit Criteria for UAAG 2.0:
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------
>>> Exit Criteria
>>> The User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group intends to submit
>>> this document for consideration as a W3C Proposed Recommendation as soon
>>> as the following conditions are met. We expect to complete testing and
>>> show evidence of meeting all exit criteria, and change or remove the
>>> at-risk items as needed, no earlier than @@[date]@@.
>>>
>>> 1. Define test cases: Identify a set of tests needed to cover all UAAG
>>> normative success criteria.
>>>
>>> 2. Test Implementations: Perform these tests on multiple separate
>>> combinations of users agents and/or user agents and extensions.
>>>
>>> 3. Verify interoperable results: Find at least two independent
>>> implementations of each normative success criterion.
>>>
>>> Note on Independent Implementations:
>>> 1) Success criteria that can only be met using the rendering engine of
>>> the user agent will need implementations of two different rendering
>>> engines.
>>>
>>> 2) Success criteria that can only be met with the user agent user
>>> interface may have implementations using the same rendering engine.
>>>
>>> 2) Success criteria that can be met with an extension to the user agent
>>> may be met with two different extensions on the same base user agent.
>>>
>>> 3) Implementations (plugins, extensions or user agents) must be from
>>> different code bases in order to be considered independent.
>>>
>>>
>>
>

-- 
_______________________________
Jeanne Spellman
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative
jeanne@w3.org
Received on Thursday, 12 March 2015 19:39:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 12 March 2015 19:39:16 UTC