RE: Brainstorming ideas for Full-Partial ATAG2 Conformance Types

Hi Tim,

Sorry for the delay...I've been very busy these last couple of weeks...my comments marked JR.

Tim wrote:

What about tools (or collections of tools) that do some SCs of Level A, and some SCs of AA, as well as some SCs of AAA (they may "overengineer"), but don't do all SCs at a particular level?..

JR: Below level A, this should be handled by our "'progress towards conformance' statement". In addition, Claimants are free to point people to their "scorecard" showing Yes,No, Not Applicable on the individual SCs which would reflect the over-engineering.

(SIDE NOTE: Should credit be given for "overengineering" above a certain level?)
We may be implicitly assuming that in seeking conformance
that first tools (or collections of tools) may strive to meet all of A, then all of AA, and then finally all of AAA, but that may not be the case, tools may be "all over the place" when it comes to meeting SCs at different levels.  Have we adequately taken this into account if it is so (and should we)?

Also, for "partial conformance", should we distinguish between (for example, only meeting one SC at level A, and meeting all but one SC at level A) - is the latter somehow better than the former (if not, should it be)?

JR: I think that may get too complicated...the SCs are not all the same difficulty, so doing just the checking an repair for example is much more work than some of the others.

Just some thoughts after the call..

Take care
Tim Boland NIST    



Cheers,
Jan

(Mr) Jan Richards, M.Sc.
jrichards@ocad.ca | 416-977-6000 ext. 3957
Inclusive Design Research Centre (IDRC)
OCAD University

Received on Monday, 28 November 2011 07:44:19 UTC