- From: Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 20:40:03 -0500
- To: Silver Task Force <public-silver@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <8c3e3d63-cd86-20c8-d074-6d3448bcd94b@spellmanconsulting.com>
== Summary == We received an update on the Challenges document moving through the AGWG approval process. AGWG members replied to the survey accepting the document for a FPWD this week. There were a number of comments, and the document will go back for updates and another survey in January. We worked more on the Sampling proposal <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1y_HOyuMKltOQoZr0Gk7hMQXi3Jd8Mc5fyr-XkH7kZQY/edit#heading=h.j07liyrhk7zr>. We discussed whether we should have component testing, flow testing or both. We want to be able to provide all three options so that organizations can evaluate their site in the way that works for them. For example, a company wanting to evaluate their website could declare the major workflows that a user could encounter. Silver conformance section would tell them how to select workflows and a high level of how to test workflows. Within the workflow, there would be components that would need to be tested, like navigation and footer, that would also have to be accessible as part of the workflow. We discussed how VPAT would fit into the Silver conformance. Once the Silver conformance model gets a little more solid, we want to involve ITI so that the VPAT associated with Silver would reflect the Silver conformance model. For example, a Silver VPAT could start with an organization (company) listing the primary workflows tested. This is hypothetical, and no contact has yet been made with ITI. == Minutes == https://www.w3.org/2019/12/17-silver-conf-minutes.html
Received on Wednesday, 18 December 2019 01:40:07 UTC