Testing website #2 responses

Dear Eval TF.

Please find below the summary of results for testing website #2.

In total four people participated in the questionnaire.

Step 1: Define the Evaluation Scope
Four people answered this question. One gave a description of the target website and its parts, in terms of titles of pages. One gave a list of specific URIs. Two people gave a URI. All described goal and conformance target.

 *   One commented on what was to be excluded and expressed the need for more clarity on the scope of the evaluation. On such a diverse website with many sub-domains, more contact with a customer is needed to define the precise pages that are to be evaluated.
 *   Two people commented that the listing of techniques is not useful or not clear at this point.
 *   Two people miss 'the purpose of the website' in this step.
 *   One commented on the lack of guidance on regular expressions.

Step 2: Explore the Target Website
Four answered.

Step 2.a: Common web pages
This step produces quite different outcomes

 *   One considered all pages common
 *   Three mentioned specific common pages. One made a selection of common pages based on their visual outlook (templates) and one made a selection based on the function of the page in the website. One mentioned three common pages / area's.

Step 2.b Common functionality
The outcome of this step is pretty much the same for all respondents, one added extra functionalities depending on a user account (which was not supplied).

 *   Three mentioned the same common functionality
 *   One mentioned extra functionalities the others hadn't included.

Step 2.c Variety of Web page type
Three answered.

 *   One referred to step 2.a
 *   Two described the different templates that are used

Step 2.d technologies
Two answered, they have the same result. One adds a comment: this is confusing.

Step 3: Select a Representative Sample
Four answered

 *   Two gave specific URIs, one selected a small sample, one selected all the pages
 *   The two respondents who gave URIs selected the pages/processes they described in Step 2 (mostly). They both add a random sample, one of 5 pages, one of 2
 *   The respondent who selected a small sample described (how to reach) the selected pages. The small sample does not offer confidence for representativeness

Optional questions
I did not include this section in the summary. The comments are not really fit for summary as there is few overlap between them. See the results (https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/48225/testrun2/results).

All the best,

Martijn Houtepen

Accessibility Foundation

www.accessibility.nl
@AccessibilityNL