- From: Eric Eggert <ee@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2019 09:10:40 +0200
- To: "Shadi Abou-Zahra" <shadi@w3.org>
- Cc: "Hidde de Vries" <hidde@w3.org>, wai-eo-editors@w3.org
On 8 Oct 2019, at 8:46, Shadi Abou-Zahra wrote: > Adding Hidde who also had some thoughts on continuous testing: > > > On 08/10/2019 08:34, Eric Eggert wrote: >> >> >>> On 7. Oct 2019, at 21:36, Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org> wrote: >>> >>>> ### Issue 6 >>>> * Level: ED-high >>>> * Location: 7 >>>> * Current Wording: Tools can be integrated into different work >>>> environments. For example, into your web browser, content >>>> management system >>>> - CMS, code editor, or JavaScript framework. >>>> * Suggested Revision: Tools can be integrated into different work >>>> environments. For example, into your web browser, content >>>> management system >>>> - CMS, code editor, or your deploy process. >>>> * Rationale: This misses continuous integration methods that are >>>> available, >>>> I am unsure how one would build it into the JavaScrip framework. >>>> You can >>>> surely add it to the testing suite for your JavaScript framework, >>>> but that >>>> rings differently to me. >>> >>> I think the phrase "deploy process" is too jargony. Changed to "your >>> JavaScript" (ie. dropped "framework"), which should be more >>> accurate. >> >> From my point of view this makes it /less/ accurate. You add the >> tests into the build or deploy process, not into the JavaScript or >> Framework. This gives the false impression that you have to ship more >> code to production to test for accessibility. I feel very strongly >> that we should underline that testing during deployment is a thing, >> as that is where most of automated non-accessibility testing happens. >> Not mentioning it means that watchers might get the impression that >> they have to have separate testing workflows for accessibility, >> leading to not adopting accessibility testing in a systematic way in >> the first place. > > Point taken, thanks Eric. It is again a situation of balancing between > technically correct and easily understandable. The phrase is > currently: > > [[ > Tools can be integrated into different work environments. For example, > into your web browser, content management system (C-M-S), code editor, > or your JavaScript. > ]] > > Do you both have ideas how we can say "deploy process" or "continuous > testing/integration" in more understandable terms for non-techies (ie > for potential procurers of tools, project managers, etc)? Project managers should know what a deploy process & continuous testing is, they have to plan for both. I don't think there is a way to make that more understandable for “non-techies” as we can’t make JavaScript, code editor, content management system or web browser more understandable for “non-techies”. For “non-techies”, all of those words are jargon. And that‘s ok imho because we said ”work environments” first. > Thanks, > Shadi > > -- > Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/ > Accessibility Strategy and Technology Specialist > Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) > World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) -- Eric Eggert Web Accessibility Specialist Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) at World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
Received on Tuesday, 8 October 2019 07:10:46 UTC