public-wai-evaltf@w3.org from September 2012 by subject

*reminder* input sought: diagram descriptions (WCAG WG comment #5)

*reminder* TPAC 2012 Registration

3.1.4 Step 1.d: Define the Context of Website Use

[input requested] 3.4.2 Step 4.b: Use WCAG 2.0 Techniques Where Possible (Optional)

Agenda EvalTF

Agenda EvalTF Telco

Agenda EvalTF Telco - regrets

Agenda EvalTF today

AT Accessibility Support required across the web site.

Automated testing

AW: Agenda EvalTF

AW: Agenda EvalTF today

AW: AT Accessibility Support required across the web site.

AW: Randomly choosing pages

Call for Review: Website Accessibility Conformance Evaluation Methodology (WCAG-EM)

changes to 3.4.2 Step 4.b: Use WCAG 2.0 Techniques Where Possible (Optional)

Comment on 3.3

Comment on 3.3 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

comment on WACEM 1.0 -- use of internal links

comments for WCAG-EM

EvalTF agenda

EvalTF new documents for review

EvalTF new Editor Draft available

EvalTF result review by WCAG WG

evaltf-ISSUE-8 (Numbering): Numbering of sections and steps [WCAG-EM - Website Accessibility Conformance Evaluation Methodology 1.0]

evaltf-ISSUE-9 (Sampling): Refine the sampling procedure to ensure being representative [WCAG-EM - Website Accessibility Conformance Evaluation Methodology 1.0]

Examples for evaluating the methodology

Fwd: Minutes for Teleconference on 12 September 2012

Fwd: Minutes WCAG 06 Sep 2012

Fwd: Minutes WCAG 13 Sep 2012

Fwd: Re: Call for Review: Website Accessibility Conformance Evaluation Methodology (WCAG-EM)

Minutes for Teleconference on 13 September 2012

Minutes for Teleconference on 20 September 2012

Minutes for Teleconference on 27 September 2012

Minutes for Teleconference on 6 September 2012

New Editor Draft available

New Editor Draft EvalTF for review

New Public Working Draft of Methodology

Questions to be asking ourselves if/when we use our draft methodology to evaluate some websites

Randomly choosing pages

Regrets

regrets - Re: Agenda EvalTF

Think 3.1.4 needs to be reconsidered, at least for sites that have more than one web team.

Thoughts about the differentiation of reporting types (Basic | Detailed | In-depth)

Two comments Methodology doc

wrong list - apologies for the noise! (was Re: New Public Working Draft of Methodology)

Last message date: Sunday, 30 September 2012 19:38:54 UTC