W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-comments-wcag20@w3.org > October 2008

WCAG 2.0 automated verification and intended reporting layout

From: Dylan Nicholson <d.nicholson@hisoftware.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2008 23:17:33 -0400
To: "public-comments-wcag20@w3.org" <public-comments-wcag20@w3.org>
Message-ID: <90200BC582E4FF488816D357540C1D4D0FFFB2C57E@VMBX103.ihostexchange.net>

Has anyone thought been given to the intended reporting layout for tools that automatically verify websites for WCAG 2.0 compliance?  As a developer, the logical "testing unit" would seem to be a "technique", while the logical grouping is a "success criterion".  But many techniques are shared across multiple criterion, so it seems that "technique" results would necessarily be shown more than once, e.g.:

Success Criteria 1.1.1
   H36 - passed
   H2 - passed
   H37 - passed
Success Criteria 2.4.4
   H2 - passed
Success Criteria 2.4.9
   H2 - passed

Further, would a comprehensive report be expected to include the "G" techniques, which generally can't be fully automated, but could be listed as advice to the user as to how to check the page, potentially automatically filtering out which pages they are relevant to (e.g., no point showing G94 if a page has no non-text content)?


Received on Wednesday, 15 October 2008 03:42:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:14:50 UTC