Re: Formalizing WCAG 2.0 test procedures

> AFAIRC it's the WCAG WG's job to define test procedures for common failures 
> and suffiecient techniques. And there are already procedures in the 
> Techniques document. However everyone can make proposals for test procedures.

Hi. What do you mean by "procedures in the Techniques document already"? 
The ones in pseudo code listed at ? 
Maybe other document?

>> P.S.: It's OK to have a big & complete test sample repository, with 
>> examples of what is good and what is bad, but I think it would have much 
>> more value if every/most/as many as possible/some of these test samples 
>> would come with a declarative rule/condition that formalizes such 
>> conditions is a machine testable way.
> Not 'every' success criterion in WCAG 2.0 is machine-testable. So 'as many as 
> possible' should be the goal :-)

I agree :-). However, for those which are not machine testable a 
pseudo-code or paragraph could be OK. My proposal is to combine pseudo 
code and machine-testable rules "as possible" so that both pseudo code and 
machine testable rules COMPLEMENT/REINFORCE each other.


Received on Wednesday, 6 December 2006 17:54:16 UTC