- From: Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com>
- Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2020 14:00:01 -0500
- To: public-silver@w3.org
- Message-ID: <0c74d80f-047c-7cb8-eef1-5858daa35044@spellmanconsulting.com>
Apologies for my inaccurate summary. Peter said that a site that had errors on automated tests would not be able to reach bronze. We did not have consensus on this, but it is a direction for more exploration. jeanne On 2/22/2020 11:20 AM, Korn, Peter wrote: > Jeanne, Detlev, > > I remember the conversation slightly differently: first, that it would > be useful in the scoring example to cite which tests were automated or > not, and then second, that a site that was NOT able to succeed using > only automated tests couldn’t reach bronze. > > Regards, > > Peter > >> On Feb 22, 2020, at 4:12 AM, Detlev Fischer >> <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de> wrote: >> >> I think the briefest look at the Conformance Challenges section >> https://htmlpreview.github.io/?https://github.com/w3c/wcag/blob/master/conformance-challenges/index.html#Appendix-A >> >> …makes it utterly clear how limited a merely automatic test will be: >> most SCs just cannot be conclusively tested automatically. So IMO >> accepting that as „bronze“ would entirely remove credibility from a >> new conformance scheme under WCAG 3.0 >> Detlev >> >> >>> Am 21.02.2020 um 22:54 schrieb Jeanne Spellman >>> <jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com>: >>> >>> 1. TheScoring Exampl >>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LfzTd_8WgTi0IUOOjUCRfRQ7e7__FRcnZow4w7zLlkY/>e >>> has a new introduction to (hopefully) explain it more clearly. >>> We discussed whether we could say that a website or project that >>> passed a WCAG 2 automated test could pass at bronze, but there >>> were objections. To be continued... >>> >>
Received on Saturday, 22 February 2020 19:00:15 UTC