- From: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 17:08:03 +0200
- To: Alistair Garrison <alistair.garrison@levelaccess.com>, Accessibility Conformance Testing <public-wcag-act@w3.org>
Hi Alistair, This is just my thought but I think we should keep "aggregation" and "scoring" separate items, even though they are somewhat related. A while back we looked into scoring/metrics but could not identify a single widely-accepted approach. Instead, we identified some quality criteria for such metrics: - https://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/2011/metrics/ I'm not sure that this situation changed, but would be delighted to discuss it separately with you and anyone else interested. Best, Shadi On 27/03/2018 14:41, Alistair Garrison wrote: > Hi, > > The Accessibility Conformance Testing (ACT) working group creates > guidance on how to create rules which allow you to determine contents’ > conformance with WCAG. > > The issue with web content is that there may be one-to-many states [of > the DOM] which each need to be tested in order to understand if a user > is actually able to interact fully with that web content. > > Section 9.3 “Rule Aggregation” might be useful for determining the > outcome for a single [DOM] state; but presumably you would need to sum > the results for each [DOM] state which can exist for a piece of content > in order to determine the overall compliance score for that piece of > content. > > Continuing with that train of thought – to provide a verifiable > conformance score for a website (as a collection of web pages; which > themselves are each a collection of pieces of web content, with > one-to-many DOM states) – would we have to detail each DOM state that > was tested; and provide instructions for how to obtain each of those DOM > states; very much like end-to-end tests? If yes, this tends to concern > me a little, as such a mechanism might quickly fall out of sync with the > website; just as content changes cause end-to-end tests to become > fragile over time unless updated. > > So, I’m starting to wonder if we have a responsibility to look at > creating an Aggregated Conformance Score (as > https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG-EM/#step5d). Something which is probability > based; which takes into account a sample size of the total number of > states – and the idea that if you currently only test DOM State 0 (for > example on page load) you are already really only taking a sample of all > the states in which your pages can exist. Noting, that for content to > be considered accessible, really all its states need to be accessible. > > Something like: > > [Estimated] Total number of states which need to be tested = [Estimated] > number of web pages * [Estimated / Heuristic] number of states those web > pages can appear in; > > Sample = ??? > > Aggregated Conformance Score = ???; with a variance of ??? > > Looking at states also enables Single Page Applications to be included. > > With European projects looking to benchmark on a broad-scale the above > may already have been considered somewhere, however, if not thoughts / > comments are most welcome. > > All the best > > Alistair Garrison > > Director of Accessibility Research > > Level Access > -- Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/ Accessibility Strategy and Technology Specialist Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
Received on Tuesday, 27 March 2018 15:08:17 UTC