Re: Evaluation process for test samples: first proposal

Hi Christophe,

Thanks for working on this! Just some more minor comments:

cstrobbe wrote:
> Status is set to "unconfirmed" (if we use the terminology from 
> the Conformance Test Process For WCAG 2.0 [1]) or something 
> similar (e.g. "unreviewed").

Even though I mistakenly used the term "unreviewed" in my mail to you, I 
think we should reuse terminology from [1] as much as possible. Sorry 
for the confusion I may have caused.


> The above description focuses on the entry and exit conditions
> in each step in the process, so I have left out a few details,
> for example, that we review test samples in batches and that
> the task force decides on acceptance during a teleconference. 

I think we also need to think about the tools we use to record the 
reviews and the TF decisions. Maybe a wiki? Simple questionnaires?


> I have also left out how we may send our work to the WCAG WG,

Yes, I think we should leave this (including step 5) out for now. WCAG 
WG may only have adequate resources for this work during Candidate 
Recommendation (CR) stage or maybe even later. For now our task is to
queue up as many test samples as possible for WCAG WG to look at later.


Regards,
   Shadi


-- 
Shadi Abou-Zahra     Web Accessibility Specialist for Europe |
Chair & Staff Contact for the Evaluation and Repair Tools WG |
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)           http://www.w3.org/ |
Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI),   http://www.w3.org/WAI/ |
WAI-TIES Project,                http://www.w3.org/WAI/TIES/ |
Evaluation and Repair Tools WG,    http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/ |
2004, Route des Lucioles - 06560,  Sophia-Antipolis - France |
Voice: +33(0)4 92 38 50 64          Fax: +33(0)4 92 38 78 22 |

Received on Tuesday, 21 November 2006 07:02:48 UTC