Re: what to do after 10 evaluations

Yes, that is my proposal. It may be useful if external people can use the same questionnaire (possibly a separate instance of the questionnaire to make it eaier to keep apart the evaluation of the one site that EVAL TF has agreed to evaluate).
And the invitation should make clear that the name/address of the site chosen as well as the identity of the tester will not be publicised.

--
Detlev Fischer
testkreis c/o feld.wald.wiese
Thedestr. 2, 22767 Hamburg

Mobil +49 (0)1577 170 73 84
Tel +49 (0)40 439 10 68-3
Fax +49 (0)40 439 10 68-5

http://www.testkreis.de
Beratung, Tests und Schulungen für barrierefreie Websites

Shadi Abou-Zahra schrieb am 10.03.2014 13:59:

> So, the proposal would be that Eval TF evaluates the same one website, 
> and we invite external people to provide any additional feedback from 
> evaluating any other website they choose?
> 
> Best,
>   Shadi
> 
> 
> On 10.3.2014 10:31, Detlev Fischer wrote:
>> Hi Shadi,
>> as I said, I think a direct comparison is fine too (as planned) and the open
>> evaluation should not replace it. The open test run would be additional and
>> independent (as outlined).
>>
>> Detlev
>>
>> On 10 Mar 2014, at 09:58, Shadi Abou-Zahra wrote:
>>
>>> The down side is that we would then not have directly comparable evaluation
>>> results.
>>
> 
> -- 
> Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/
> Activity Lead, W3C/WAI International Program Office
> Evaluation and Repair Tools Working Group (ERT WG)
> Research and Development Working Group (RDWG)
> 

Received on Monday, 10 March 2014 13:11:10 UTC