W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-silver@w3.org > April 2020

Levels of Conformance discussed on April 10, April 17, 2020

From: David Fazio <dfazio@helixopp.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2020 19:51:46 +0000
To: Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com>, Silver Task Force <public-silver@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D5DA3C66-D6A4-45CF-A4B1-1967C6E8B8B5@helixopp.com>
Jeanne asked me to send an email to the list about the conversation we have had about levels of conformance, on the last 2 calls. Please see below...

During the last 2 Silver TF meetings we discussed selecting a range of accessibility from inaccessible to good enough to superior. I suggested we benchmark off of neuropsychological evaluations since they run a myriad of comprehensive tests that rate on a similar scale to determine the functional capacity of individuals. John Foliot liked the idea, and suggested we select 5 levels (3 being not enough, 7 being too many). John also asked me provide insight on how many levels I’ve seen in neuropsyche evals, since I offered to use mine from over the years, as a benchmark. Over the last 24 years I have seen the following 9 levels, in various tests:
Impaired,

Mildly impaired,

Moderately impaired,

Severely impaired,

Average,

Low average,

High average,

Superior,

Very superior.

At the last Silver TF meeting there was consensus for John’s suggestion to select 5 levels.






Received on Sunday, 19 April 2020 19:52:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Sunday, 19 April 2020 19:52:04 UTC