ATAG 2.0 Tester (Author) Template (Form) 11-1 - for Success Criterion 1.1 Level A

DISCLAIMER: Data entered on this form is informative only. The submitter bears all responsibility for the accuracy of the data. The data entered on this form may be reviewed by the W3C AUWG?

Answers to all questions are required; if you feel a question is not applicable, just write "not applicable" and specify why. If you need additional ATAG information (including access to the ATAG2.0 spec and techniques) to complete this form, you may go to the ATAG site. If you need additional WAI testing resources, go to ? Please submit this form to "testreport site". For more information on ISO16071, go to ?. This information will be made public. This information will be made accessible. After submitting this form, you may proceed directly to the Tester Form for Success Criterion 1.2, or back to the main ATAG test page. It is possible that some results may be machine-reportable, in which case the developer should have noted this information on the developer's form (link?), and you could attach the machine-reportable results to this form. There are no dependencies on other tester forms for filling out this form. Thank you.

This form has several parts as follows: (a) Part 1 - General Information (general-not success-criterion specific), (b) Part 2 - Specific Test Questions for Success Criterion 1.1 (specific to success criterion), and (c) Part 3 - Summary Information for Success Criterion 1.1.

Part 1 - General Information

1. Name of Tester (Author):

2. Contact Info of Tester/Author(s):

3. Address of Tester/Author(s):

4. Email of Tester/Author(s):

5. Phone Number(s) of Tester/Author(s):

6. Fax# of Tester/Author(s):

7. Authoring Tool Tested (please be specific) - category of authoring tool, format output from authoring tool, and platform that authoring tool uses):

8. Have you accessed the developers form (if available) (link?) for this particular authoring tool and success criterion? If so, do you have any questions on any of that information? It is not necessary (but desirable) for the developer to have submitted a form for the tool you are testing.

Part 2 - Specific Test Questions for Success Criterion 1.1

TEST PURPOSE: To evaluate an authoring tool interface according to ISO16071

TEST REQUIREMENTS: Success Criterion 1.1 - The authoring tool interface must conform to ISO16071

9. (perform specific authoring actions) What specific authoring actions did you initiate for this particular authoring tool?

10. [(link to developer's) 7.2.1.1 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate the enabling of user input/output choice according to Part 7.2.1.1 of ISO16071:2002(E) (please be specific-if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated?)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

11. [(link to developer's) 7.2.2 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate enabling the user to perform task effectively with any single input device according to Part 7.2.2 of ISO16071:2002(E)(please be specific -if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

12. [(link to developer's) 7.2.4 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate enabling user setting of timed responses according to Part 7.2.4 of ISO16071:2002(E)(please be specific-if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

13. [(link to developer's) 7.2.10 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate an avoidance of seizure-inducing blink rates according to Part 7.2.10 of ISO16071:2002(E)(please be specific-if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

14. [(link to developer's) 7.2.12 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate enabling user control of time-sensitive presentation of information according to Part 7.2.12 of ISO16071:2002(E)(please be specific-if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

15. [(link to developer's) 7.3.1 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate the use of system-standard input/output according to Part 7.3.1 of ISO16071:2002(E)(please be specific-if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

16. [(link to developer's) 7.3.2 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate the provision of object labels according to Part 7.3.2 of ISO16071:2002(E)(please be specific-if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

17. [(link to developer's) 7.3.3 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate how to make event notification available to assistive technologies according to Part 7.3.3 of ISO16071:2002(E)(please be specific-if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

18. [(link to developer's) 7.3.4 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate how to make object attributes available to assistive technologies according to Part 7.3.4 of ISO16071:2002(E)(please be specific-if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

19. [(link to developer's) 7.3.5 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate the use of system-standard input/output according to Part 7.3.5 of ISO16071:2002(E)(please be specific-if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

20. [(link to developer's) 7.4.11 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate the reserving of accessibility key mappings according to Part 7.4.11 of ISO16071:2002(E)(please be specific-if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

21. [(link to developer's) 7.4.13 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate the separation of keyboard navigation and activation according to Part 7.4.13 of ISO16071:2002(E)(please be specific-if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

22. [(link to developer's) 7.5.2 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate the enabling of location of button functions according to Part 7.5.2 of ISO16071:2002(E)(please be specific-if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

23. [(link to developer's) 7.5.9 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate the provision of alternatives to chorded key presses according to Part 7.5.9 of ISO16071:2002(E)(please be specific-if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

24. [(link to developer's) 7.6.1 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate font customization and legibility according to Part 7.6.1 of ISO16071:2002(E)(please be specific if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

25. [(link to developer's) 7.8.1 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate alternatives to the use of color as the sole source of information according to Part 7.8.1 of ISO16071:2002(E)(please be specific - if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

26. [(link to developer's) 7.8.6 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate provision of alternatives to coding by hue according to Part 7.8.6 of ISO16071:2002(E)(please be specific if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

27. [(link to developer's) 7.9.5 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate allowing users to choose visual indication of audio output according to Part 7.9.5 of ISO16071:2002(E) (please be specific - if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

28. [(link to developer's) 7.10.1 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate allowing task-relevant warning or error information to persist according to Part 7.10.1 of ISO16071:2002(E) (please be specific - if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

29. [(link to developer's) 7.12.3 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate enabling cursor and pointer customization according to Part 7.12.3 of ISO16071:2002(E) (please be specific - if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

30. [(link to developer's) 7.13.1 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate enabling non-pointer navigation directly to windwows according to Part 7.13.1 of ISO16071:2002(E) (please be specific - if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

31. [(link to developer's) 7.14.1 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate provision of focus cursor according to Part 7.14.1 of ISO16071:2002(E) (please be specific - if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

32. [(link to developer's) 7.14.2 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate provision of keyboard navigation according to Part 7.14.2 of ISO16071:2002(E) (please be specific - if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

33. [(link to developer's) 7.14.3 entry and/or spec?] For each specific authoring action mentioned previously, did the authoring tool interface demonstrate provision of navigation to task-appropriate groups of controls according to Part 7.14.3 of ISO16071:2002(E) (please be specific - if (so/not), how was it (so/not) demonstrated)? What test procedure did you use? What test environment did you use?

Part 3 - Summary Information for Success Criterion 1.1

34. Objectively, from your perspective, did this authoring tool interface "pass" ("yes" answers to all previous testing questions) ATAG2.0 Success Criterion 1.1 for Level A? If yes, why? If not, why not? (please be specific)

35. Please give any other information you feel may be helpful (please be specific):

36. Please comment on the quality of the questions asked and/or the specification/techniques (please be specific):

37. What other questions do you feel might be helpful (please be specific)?

38. Date of this evaluation:

Thank you very much! Your evaluation will be saved and made publicly available.