W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > February 2004

Various Test/Spec questions from WCAG

From: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:55:10 +0900
Message-Id: <F00B924F-60E3-11D8-B2DD-000393A63FC8@w3.org>
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
Hello QAWG,

As you know, the WCAG working group is taking QA seriously and have  
been trying to follow our guidelines as closely as possible. I usually  
try to answer question from Jenae Andershonis (QA contact within WCAG  
WG), but she recently sent me a batch for which I could use your  
insight, and I thought you'd be interested in the feedback they  
provide, too...

Specl GL:
> I have a question about Checkpoint 7.1. Use conformance key words. The  
> latest structure for WCAG 2.0 is Principle | Guideline | Level (1, 2  
> or 3) Success Criteria.
> My question is at what level should the RFC 2119 keywords be applied?  
> Should the keywords be used in the statement for Principle, Guideline  
> or Success Criteria? Or at all three? My guess is that it should be at  
> the Success Criteria level.

So do I. What do you think?

Test GL (based on TR version)
> Question #1
> Checkpoint 4.3. Automation of testing is encouraged.
> We weren’t sure if this meant that the test cases should be  
> automatable, (i.e. doesn’t involve a human opinion). Or if it means  
> that we should engage with vendors of tools like A-Prompt and Bobby,  
> or does it mean something even different than these two  
> interpretations.

Not sure what Jenae means by "engaging" here, but my interpretation of  
the GL is that the tests should be automatable when possible. (which,  
for WCAG, is not always/necessarily/easily possible)

> Question #2
> Checkpoint 6.1. Organize conformance testing activities.
> Would the definition of vendor be like Watchfire (Bobby tool)?

I think this is an interesting one... AFAIK vendors here mean  
implementors of the specification, which does not necessarily mean  
anything for Guideline specifications... A wording warning for the QAF,  
I suppose.

No "vendor" entry in the QA glossary it seems:

> Question #3
> Checkpoint 6.2. Encourage Vendors to publish test results.
> Is the preferred “Special place” within the W3C site or a link to the  
> vendor’s site?
> And should we create something like the 508 VPAT for the vendor to  
> complete?

IIRC, for test result publication, W3C is preferred, though not  
strongly. Correct?

> Question #4
> Our proposed charter [2] states that we would commit to attaining QA  
> level three. Now that the conformance structure has been changed to A,  
> AA and AAA, what would level three equate to? And do we need to list  
> out of conformance goals for all three of the QA specs.
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2003/08/wcag-charter.html

I think this has been simplified and corrected in Ops, correct?
I do not, however, recall what level three would be equivalent to (A or  
AA I guess), could anyone tell me?

Hope this list of question provides you with interesting feedback, and  
that you can help me give good answers to this very motivated group.
Received on Monday, 16 February 2004 19:55:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:14:32 UTC