Re: Checkpoint mapping between WCAG 1.0 and WCAG 2.0 (fwd)

At 12:13 PM 10/16/00 -0400, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>We have been asked by the GL group, using this mapping as a guide, to produce
>a draft of the techniques that actually looks at which of these things can be
>checked by a tool.


You'll need to define what it means to be "checked by a tool".  Although 
it's possible for a tool to determine failure to pass certain checkpoints 
(e.g. absence of ALT text), it's only rarely possible for any tool to 
determine, by purely automatic means, that a page passes a checkpoint (e.g. 
is the ALT text correct?).

Human judgment is needed in almost all cases. On the other hand, a tool can 
help supply that judgment.

In other words, for each checkpoint there's the questions:

- Can an automatic check produce any true negatives?
- Will that check show all true negatives?
- Can an automatic check produce any true positives?
- Will that check show all true positives?
- Is there any tool that can aid human judgment when human judgement is 
needed?  And how much help does it give? (This is a -    - subjective but 
important consideration).

You'll need to decide what "can be checked by a tool" means.

Len
--
Leonard R. Kasday, Ph.D.
Institute on Disabilities/UAP and Dept. of Electrical Engineering at Temple 
University
(215) 204-2247 (voice)                 (800) 750-7428 (TTY)
http://astro.temple.edu/~kasday         mailto:kasday@acm.org

Chair, W3C Web Accessibility Initiative Evaluation and Repair Tools Group
http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/

The WAVE web page accessibility evaluation assistant: 
http://www.temple.edu/inst_disabilities/piat/wave/

Received on Monday, 16 October 2000 14:20:26 UTC