- From: Christophe Strobbe <christophe.strobbe@esat.kuleuven.be>
- Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 15:11:27 +0200
- To: public-wai-ert-tsdtf@w3.org
Hi Shadi, At 11:28 27/03/2007, Shadi Abou-Zahra wrote: >Hi, > >Ref: <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/2006/tests/process> > >While my action item was to update the review process document, I >have a proposal to extend the workflow slightly in order to better >accommodate for recording bugs and issues. > >Basically the only change is two new states that can be outcomes of >step 5, the "Task Force Decision": > - "Bug" refers to a minor problem with the test sample, for > example an incorrect value in the metadata or similar. These bugs > can be fixed by a reviewer and are then put out for another round > of group review by means of an online strawpoll. So "Bug" would become the input label for another step: either "5b" (or another new number), or step 3, which would then have more "privileges" for the reviewer. > - "Issue" refers to a problem in the Technique (or other parts of > WCAG 2.0) rather than in the test sample itself. The test sample is > used to outline the issue which is documented in the Wiki and sent > to the WCAG WG for their review. This looks good to me. What we haven't filled in yet is what happens after feedback from the WCAG WG. My first thought is that the test samples goes back to step 3 (initial evaluation) to undergo a content review, and then goes through the rest of the process again. However, I think we still have sufficient time to think about this. One thing to note about the process is that step 3 does not allow any changes to the test sample. A reviewer can currently only propose changes in the review (wiki page), which are then voted one, and only implemented after consensus in the task force. (This would also apply to feedback from the WCAG WG.) Best regards, Christophe -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Departement of Electrical Engineering - Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 - 3001 Leuven-Heverlee - BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 http://www.docarch.be/ Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm
Received on Tuesday, 27 March 2007 13:12:15 UTC