This document provides a set of initial requirements that need to be incorporated in the document "Techniques for Automated and Semi-Automated Evaluation Tools". Further refinements of this document will occur under the scope of the Evaluation and Repair Tools Working Group (ERT WG) discussions.
Copyright © 2013 W3C® (MIT, ERCIM, Keio), All Rights Reserved. W3C liability, trademark and document use rules apply.
The document presented here gathers requirements for the document "Techniques for Automated and Semi-Automated Evaluation Tools", in the following called the document. This requirements' document will present also some scenarios on the use of the main document.
The purpose of the document "Techniques for Automated and Semi-Automated Evaluation Tools" is to present typical features of web accessibility evaluation tools that will support the reader in defining different tool profiles.
The objectives of the document "Techniques for Automated and Semi-Automated Evaluation Tools" include the following:
In addition, the document may provide additional information on supporting developers of web accessibility evaluation tools to present test results to different audiences and how to integrate their tools into different development workflows.
The document "Techniques for Automated and Semi-Automated Evaluation Tools" is targeted mainly to development managers and developers of web accessibility evaluation tools. Under this scope, we will not distinguish between commercial and open source developers, although there are use cases that could be more relevant to one group than to the other.
A secondary audience of this document are users of accessibility evaluation tools like accessibility experts or web developers.
Examples of tools that are included are:
The document will contain descriptions of different features that are included in accessibility evaluation tools, which help to classify them and to identify their limitations. Typical examples include:
Here we will present two or more scenarios which can put in context the recommendations of the document.
John is a development manager in a small software company creating testing tools for mobile and desktop web applications. Due to increasing demand from customers, the company is evaluating the possibility to extend the software to evaluate web accessibility. John consults the document to get a general overview of typical features from accessibility evaluation tools. He also gathers information about resources that helped him to understand the implications of this new functionality and how their existing tools will map into the profiles defined in the document. He creates a matrix to compare the existing characteristics from its tool with the features of accessibility tools. With the result of this comparison, he is able to estimate the effort necessary to implement the new features of the tool and create an implementation roadmap.
Marc is a system architect working for the IT department of a medium sized company, which needs to introduce accessibility evaluation functions in their own intranet content generation tools. Marc is familiar with software specification techinques, but not so acquainted with the accessibility domain. He will use the document as an input to generate the tool specification, given that it defines desirable, expected or simply typical features of evaluation tools. Marc choose the profile that best fits the needs his company, and draws inspiration from it to get a requirements list and a set of use cases. Marc prioritizes a required subset of features and use cases, while leaving others as optionally supported. He then wireframes user interface prototypes that provide a sensible representation for the different actors that will use the tool. In this protoype, the document may serve as background on the different ways the results of accessibility tests may be presented.
The following issues are not covered in this document:
What follows is a preliminary table of contents for the document: