ok now how do you define "sufficiently significant change “ this is what drives you nuts on creating Success CRITERIA (PS broken record warning This is why I think we should focus on what should be done - rather than SC about what has to be done to conform. You just end up being too limited when you have to have everything be testable objectively. Which is what SC require. …. gregg > On May 9, 2016, at 1:17 PM, White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org> wrote: > > > > From: David MacDonald [mailto:david100@sympatico.ca <mailto:david100@sympatico.ca>] > Sent: Monday, May 09, 2016 1:17 PM > To: White, Jason J > > My issue with point of regard is that it would be difficult to test ... perhaps it could be something like.... less than xxxx pixels from the point of focus. However, I understand that the Point of regard may not be anywhere near the focus, which would make defining it in a testable way harder... > > Would it be too strong to require the author to mark as important any sufficiently significant change to a user interface component that does not have focus? Sufficiently significant would include, at least, changes caused by a user’s action, and certain other changes as well, according to a yet to be defined criterion. > > If the point of regard just happens to coincide with the location of the change, that’s just good fortune so far as the user is concerned, but it shouldn’t affect the requirement that the author needs to meet. > > > This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited. > > > Thank you for your compliance. >
Received on Monday, 9 May 2016 19:51:53 UTC