- From: Mikael Snaprud <mikael.snaprud@tingtun.no>
- Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 14:28:49 +0200
- To: John Hicks <jwjhix@gmail.com>, Alistair Garrison <alistair.garrison@ssbbartgroup.com>
- Cc: "public-auto-wcag@w3.org" <public-auto-wcag@w3.org>
Hello, You will also find an example from the EIII project at: https://www.accessiblecheck.com/ Thanks, Mikael On 25. okt. 2016 14:24, John Hicks wrote: > Dear Alistair, > > I am not sure exactly which meeting it was or if it referred to something I > might have said : > > Urbilog.fr has developped 3 automatic testing tools based on Expert System > in the AI sense. > > The "Expert" part was not user input but the "clips" expert system as > created by nasa : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CLIPS > > The essence of the idea is to transform each HTML element into a statement > in a declarative language and then test the truth of these statements > w.r.t. the rule-set in question (508 and Wcag 1 in the beginning, RGAA > later). > > One of these tools also had the question and answer part, which, as you say > becomes so very tedious so quickly. > > I am still hoping to get one of these applications, designed for IBM > initially, but to which the IP rights belong to the developper, into open > source. > > John > > > > > On 25 October 2016 at 14:07, Alistair Garrison < > alistair.garrison@ssbbartgroup.com> wrote: > >> Hi Wilco, All, >> >> >> >> In the July 2015 Auto-WCAG blog - https://www.w3.org/community/ >> auto-wcag/2015/07/24/introducing-the-auto-wcag-user-input-template/, >> under Next steps I was reading that: >> >> >> >> “Some participants of the auto-wcag community group are currently >> implementing the prototype of a User Testing Tool based on the questions >> developed in the structured approach described in this post. The tool runs >> in the user’s web browser and connects to a database storing the user >> input.” >> >> >> >> Out of interest, could I ask which participants are working on this >> “expert-system” tool? And, if work is still under way? >> >> I too developed an interview based expert-system ages ago – for testing >> the accessibility of a web page (thankfully they were more static back >> then). >> >> >> >> With all such systems you call your tests “rules”, and you follow a very >> similar grammar to the one proposed in Auto-WCAG. I used Jess formatting >> initially (http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov/), then developed my own system… >> >> I finalised my expert system some years ago – it looked at WCAG 1.0 AA. I >> demoed it to several organisations, and got some good reviews! >> >> The issue was that although an interesting way to proceed – only when you >> actually used it for commercial audits did you realize how slow such as >> process is. The same questions have to be asked again and again of the >> user – for example, for each img node – which is overkill if you are only >> looking to find enough faults to show something is an issue. >> >> >> >> For example, http://wilcofiers.github.io/auto-wcag/rules/SC1-1-1-text- >> alternative.html - Contains questions you need to ask the user about each >> image – “Is this element solely for decorative purposes”? >> >> >> >> With actual implementation knowledge, it is certainly not an approach I >> would suggest for large-scale monitoring purposes, as it simply takes too >> long to assess each page looked at; and requires human judgement which can >> be wildly different. Auto-WCAG tests, being formatted in a very specific >> way, also will not slip easily into other testing platforms. >> >> My understanding was that we were concentrating on developing fully >> automatic tests – which could be plugged into any testing platform – the >> output from which could easily be compared. >> >> >> >> With manual steps in a number of the current tests, which also include >> design constraints such as “Presented item - Web page (with title either >> highlighted or in a seperate textbox)”, I think we are making it hard for >> ourselves to achieve the comparability goal; or even create tests that >> achieve AUTO-WCAG’s desired aims. >> >> >> >> It would only take a short amount of time to re-assemble the current >> “rules” into sets of atomic fully-automated tests – by leaving the manual >> testing steps aside; and I wonder if this isn’t the direction we should be >> moving in instead – and may prove significantly quicker. Which, I also >> should mention seems to have been the approach of the EIII project from >> which Auto-WCAG was initially born (http://checkers.eiii.eu/en/tests/). >> >> >> >> My question to the group is “are we developing Auto-WCAG rules for an >> expert system tool”? and, if yes – why exactly? >> >> >> >> I’d be very interested to discuss the above, and hear comments from the >> whole group. >> >> All the best >> >> Alistair >> >> --- >> >> Alistair Garrison >> >> Senior Accessibility Engineer >> >> SSB Bart Group >> > -- Mikael Snaprud www.Tingtun.no Cell: +47 91 862 892 Co-ordinator of www.eiii.eu
Received on Tuesday, 25 October 2016 12:32:45 UTC