- From: Roberto Scano \(IWA/HWG\) <r.scano@webprofession.com>
- Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 08:26:59 +0100
- To: "'Velleman, Eric'" <evelleman@bartimeus.nl>, <public-wai-evaltf@w3.org>
With CMS the problem is that "web pages" are all similars. Is important to define different page template or different page content to evalutate. Otherwise, if we analyze for example a blog, a different page could be a blog post with a multimedia content inside (youtube video, slideshare,etc.). This is more difficult in case of Web apps, but I think that for these could be good to refer to ATAG 2.0 actual work (if these web apps generate web content) --- Roberto Scano International Webmasters Association / The HTML Writers Guild http://www.iwanet.org -----Messaggio originale----- Da: Velleman, Eric [mailto:evelleman@bartimeus.nl] Inviato: domenica 27 gennaio 2013 01:13 A: public-wai-evaltf@w3.org Oggetto: Size of random sample Dear all, More discussion about the new random sample section: <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20130122#step3e> <https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/48225/evaltfq7/results> 3. The size of the sample must depend upon the size and complexity of the site (number of pages and variety of content). In the structured part we ask people to include at least one page for every. For the random sample I tried to do the same. And at the same time trying to steer away from having to describe how to measure the size or complexity of a website and what this means for the size of the random sample. There is more research necessary and coming up, but for the moment we should put something here that we can used for testing. What about the following direction: Proposed resolution: "Include a random sample of at least 20 percent of the number of web pages that are in the structured sample or a minimum of 5 random web pages from the scope of the website into the sample (if available)." The '20' and the '5' are of course open for discussion. Please insert your own numbers. Please let me know if this is generally the direction we should explore further. Kindest regards, Eric
Received on Sunday, 27 January 2013 07:27:28 UTC