- From: Scheppe, Kai-Dietrich <k.scheppe@telekom.de>
- Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 11:55:48 +0100
- To: "Jo Rabin" <jrabin@mtld.mobi>, "Dominique Hazael-Massieux" <dom@w3.org>
- Cc: "public-bpwg" <public-bpwg@w3.org>
Well, that was in part what I was asking yesterday. As Dom set it up, the evaluation are limited to whatever is suitable. I think that is fine, but gives the complete set of evaluations a somewhat irregular feel. Overall I think that is acceptable, because a regular feel would be more appropriate for a rigid test structure. -- Kai > -----Original Message----- > From: public-bpwg-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-bpwg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jo Rabin > Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 6:51 PM > To: Dominique Hazael-Massieux > Cc: public-bpwg > Subject: Re: A few more evaluation procedures for addendum to > BP (ACTION-872) > > > I think this looks fine, but I am wondering which sections we > are limiting the document to - I assume that we mean > > Relevant Device Properties > Additional Interpretation of the Best Practices Evaluation > Procedure (not Test) Examples > > Only "Evaluation procedure" being mandatory, though I'd have > thought that Examples would generally be useful? > > Jo > > On 21/10/2008 15:45, Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I took an action item earlier today to provide a rewrite of > a few more > > tests for the addendum to BP (aka BP 1.5), which I have done and > > inserted in Kai's latest draft, and published at: > > > http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/mobileOKPro/drafts/ED > > -mobileOK-pro10-tests-20081021.html > > > > The relevant part is at: > > > http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/mobileOKPro/drafts/ED > > -mobileOK-pro10-tests-20081021.html#access_keys > > > > I have rewritten access keys, auto refresh, avoid free text, > > background image readability, balance, with the following changes: > > * used a more compact format, removing the empty "notes to > bpwg" and > > co, > > * added a "relevant device properties" item at the top of > the list, > > in the light of our discussions on the relation of these > evaluations > > procedures with the DDC > > * reworded avoid free text, background image, and balance > to recast > > them as evaluation procedure rather than tests > > > > (I probably would have substantive comments on some of these, but I > > tried to keep my changes editorial for the time being) > > > > HTH, > > > > Dom > > > > > > > >
Received on Friday, 7 November 2008 10:56:31 UTC