W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-ert-tsdtf@w3.org > January 2009

RE: Test samples review status

From: Carlos Iglesias <carlos.iglesias@fundacionctic.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 02:11:13 +0100
Message-ID: <09700B613C4DD84FA9F2FEA52188281905254D0F@ayalga.fundacionctic.org>
To: "Christophe Strobbe" <christophe.strobbe@esat.kuleuven.be>, "TSDTF" <public-wai-ert-tsdtf@w3.org>

Hi Christophe,

> >01 - There are concerns about the effectiveness of the test samples 
> >(the use of a blockquote is not obvious)
> >02 - Concerns about quote visibility (quotes not visible in IE)
> >03 - The related technique (F2) has been changed, but still doesn't 
> >relate to the test sample
> >04 - Concerns about quote visibility (quotes not visible in IE)
> My understanding of the status of test samples
> content-structure-separation-programmatic_001
> through 004 was that I made edits, reported at 
> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert-tsdtf/2008
> Oct/0006.html>,
> to address earlier issues,
> and that we later needed to check if the technique references 
> were still OK after CR publication.
> Tim did this for these samples and also wrote that my earlier 
> edits seemed fine:
> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert-tsdtf/2008
> Nov/0014.html>.

Still think that F2 is not applicable to 03 because no there is not
change in the appearance of text that conveys meaning without using
appropriate semantic markup (I think that in this test sample is rather
the other way around)
Nothing to say about the rest of test samples if Tim has previously
agreed with the changes

> >16 - OK
> >18 - OK
> >19 - OK
> >26 - There are no changes to this test sample. 
> >The issues raised in the CR are still applicable
> The metadata were modified (more precise title, description 
> and purpose), but not the sample file.
> I assume you are proposing to change this from a pass to a 
> fail based on your argument that summary attributes on layout 
> tables are not prohibited.
> However, there is a failure F46 (referenced by the metadata): 
> "Failure of Success Criterion
> 1.3.1 due to using th elements, caption elements, or 
> non-empty summary attributes in layout tables"
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20081211/F46.html>

Extract from F46: "Empty summary attributes are acceptable on layout
tables, but not recommended."

> >30 - Issues raised in the CR has not been addressed
> I propose the following change to address the issue:
> - add a column for the courses for which the students have 
> enrolled (more "realistic" table),
> - change the summary to: "This table list students with their 
> student ID and the course for which they have enrolled. 
> Students are listed alphabetically by family name."
> >36 - One file don't follow the naming
> >conventions (not sure what the comment about the form 
> submission means)
> We have a number of test samples with forms that may be 
> submitted but where we don't want users to land on an "Error 
> 404", so we have dummy pages where the form submission 
> "lands" and that aren't really part of the test case. 

Not sure if they can be considered part of the test case or not, but
anyway think they should follow the same naming conventions

> Where 
> did you find that comment?

SR (Checks for test files)

> >37 - OK
> >41 - There are no changes to this test sample. 
> >The issues raised in the SR are still applicable
> See comment on 036. To conform to the naming convention, all 
> files ending on "_processformdummy.html" need to be renamed.

Received on Tuesday, 27 January 2009 01:11:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:53:33 UTC