Re: summary of changes etc to address issues from structure reviews

Thank you Christophe, this is very helpful! I've added it as an FAQ to:
  - <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/2006/tests/>
  - <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/tests/process>

Regards,
   Shadi


Christophe Strobbe wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Below is a summary of changes and comments to address the issues that 
> came out of the last round of structure reviews.
> 
> 
> Q (Many questions about what needs to be checked (links in metadata vs 
> test files), against which "correct format" (IDs etc), where submitter 
> info is available,...)
> A The checklist for structure review 
> <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/tests/process#structure> has been rearranged 
> to provide better guidance to reviewers.
>   With regard to level identifiers for SC's: this has been clarified in 
> the naming convention <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/tests/usingTCDL#naming> 
> (until the new convention is implemented).
> 
> 
> Q Versioning for WCAG drafts and techniques in the metadata
> A Metadata deliberately reference dated versions of WCAG documents; this 
> avoid ambiguity after the publication of new drafts (i.e. Has test case 
> X been reviewed against current or previous draft?)
> 
> 
> Q Reviewer needs the title of the SC, not just the SC number
> A pending action: integrate SC text into HTML view of metadata.
> 
> 
> Q What software is needed to correctly run a test case?
> A The 'technology' section in the metadata lists all technologies that 
> are assumed to be supported.
> 
> 
> Q Inconsistency of location of video files.
> A Issue fixed in test metadata: directory structure 
> <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/tests/usingTCDL#structure>
> 
> 
> Q Some test files don't validate.
> A This is only allowed if it's part of the purpose of the test sample; 
> the reason for validation errors needs to be mentioned in the 'purpose' 
> section of the metadata.
> 
> 
> Q What is the definition of a "correct link"?
> A A link that is not broken and gets to the resource one would expect. 
> [Note: we haven't documented this anywhere.]
> 
> 
> Q What is the definition of "correct spelling"?
> A The purpose of the structure review with regard to spelling is to 
> detect and fix spelling errors like missing letters and transposed 
> letters and similar typos that create words that don't exist or that 
> have a different meaning than was intended. (We don't have a definition 
> of correct spelling. Should we say "correct present-day spelling"?)
> Some test samples may use British spelling instead of American spelling; 
> that should be allowed.
> 
> 
> Q Is the "testelement" section still correct in light of recent WCAG 
> evolution?
> A The testelement section should reflect what is used in the test file 
> (if it is important for the test to go into this level of detail) and is 
> independent of WCAG.
> 
> 
> Q Required "file" element MUST contain one of four choices 
> (http:GetRequest, http:PostRequest, ....). What if none of these is listed?
> A In that case, the test sample fails the structure review. Code like
>   file xlink:href="../testfiles/sc1.2.1_l1_001.html
> needs to be replaced with a http:GetRequest element. [@@ We need an 
> action item for this.]
> 
> 
> Q Consistency of titles: some test sample titles are not consistent with 
> the content.
> A Needs to be checked on a case by case basis. We need to keep this in 
> mind for the next round of reviews (after the migration to the next WCAG 
> 2.0 draft).
> 
> 
> Q Should the test purpose somehow be included in the HTML files?
> A The current approach is not to do this in order to avoid duplication 
> and to keep the test files minimal.
> (Admittedly, integrating certain metadata into the HTML may be useful in 
> a test harness; it may be possible to do this on the fly, at least for 
> some of the test samples.)
> 
> 
> Q Some other comments/questions:
> A - Metadata files can be validated with many XML editors (assuming they 
> support XML Schema) and online, e.g. Validome: 
> <http://www.validome.org/xml/>. A validating XML editor should also 
> complain if a link to one of the schemas does not work.
>   - Metadata files should also be checked with the ISO Schematron (see 
> instructions at <http://bentoweb.org/refs/TCDL2.0/tsdtf_schematron.html>).
>   - The attributes "complexity" and "primary" have been removed.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Christophe
> 
> 
> ---
> Please don't invite me to LinkedIn, Facebook, Quechup or other "social 
> networks". You may have agreed to their "privacy policy", but I haven't.
> 

-- 
Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/ |
   WAI International Program Office Activity Lead   |
  W3C Evaluation & Repair Tools Working Group Chair |

Received on Thursday, 22 May 2008 12:43:36 UTC