W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-act-r@w3.org > January 2021

Re: Joint ACT-TF / ACT-Rules CG meeting, January 21st

From: Wilco Fiers <wilco.fiers@deque.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 16:31:22 +0100
Message-ID: <CAHVyjGOZyanz-nrKYivmzKGG8WSKwe0aE1AJCgvtt639hDG2VA@mail.gmail.com>
To: ACT Rules CG <public-act-r@w3.org>, Accessibility Conformance Testing <public-wcag-act@w3.org>
Oops! I meant to say Thursday, not Wednesday. Sorry folks.

On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 4:17 PM Wilco Fiers <wilco.fiers@deque.com> wrote:

> Hey folks,
> Just a quick reminder about Wednesday's joint CG / TF meeting. See the
> e-mail below for details.
>
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 4:55 PM Wilco Fiers <wilco.fiers@deque.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey folks,
>>
>> We want to invite you all to a joint meeting between the ACT Task Force,
>> and the ACT-Rules community group, to talk about how to handle state
>> testing for rules. This meeting will be on January 21st, 15:00 CEST.
>>
>> https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=ACT-TF&iso=20210121T15&p1=16&ah=1
>>
>> IRC: http://irc.w3.org?channels=#wcag-act  (port: 6665 channel #wcag-act)
>> Zoom: https://mit.zoom.us/j/234301406 (ask the password in IRC)
>>
>> Agenda:
>> - Introduction on state
>> - Examples of state in rules today
>> - Discussion on how use state in rules going forward
>>
>>
>> To briefly introduce the question; It is currently unclear whether sate
>> updating should be considered part of page exploration or if it should be
>> included in the test procedure itself. Some examples of it would be that
>> while activating different tabs and testing the content of each tab one at
>> a time is generally considered to be part of an exploratory step that is
>> done before testing. But it is fairly common when testing the contrast of a
>> link, to include testing the default, hover, and focus state in the test
>> procedure.
>>
>> Where this matters for ACT is in the scope of a rule. Should rules be
>> written so they are applicable to different states, or do we limit rules to
>> testing just the current state. In either scenario, do we want to account
>> for state in the applicability and expectations, or do we need some other
>> way to account for state in ACT rules?
>>
>>
>> I hope you'll all be able to attend.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> --
>> *Wilco Fiers*
>> Axe-core product owner - Co-facilitator WCAG-ACT - Chair ACT-R
>>
>>
>> Join me at axe-con <http://deque.com/axe-con> 2021: a free digital
>> accessibility conference.
>>
>
>
> --
> *Wilco Fiers*
> Axe-core product owner - Co-facilitator WCAG-ACT - Chair ACT-R
>
>
> Join me at axe-con <http://deque.com/axe-con> 2021: a free digital
> accessibility conference.
>


-- 
*Wilco Fiers*
Axe-core product owner - Co-facilitator WCAG-ACT - Chair ACT-R


Join me at axe-con <http://deque.com/axe-con> 2021: a free digital
accessibility conference.

deque_logo_180p.gif
(image/gif attachment: deque_logo_180p.gif)

Received on Monday, 18 January 2021 15:31:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 18 January 2021 15:31:53 UTC