- From: <Andrew.Arch@visionaustralia.org.au>
- Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 17:44:58 +1000
- To: jbrewer@w3.org, w3c-wai-eo@w3.org
Judy,
Regrets for this evening's meeting - I have a prior engagement, but may
join you later.
WRT agenda:
I support the proposed paragraph below for "evaluating" document.
Our staff have raised a concern about the "evaluating" document -
Conformance 2.1 suggests that at least one validation tool should be run
across the entire site, however none of those that we mention are capable
of doing this automatically. I don't have a solution, but we should not
tell people to do things they can't with our suggested approach/tools.
Andrew
_________________________________
Dr Andrew Arch
Manager, Internet Product Development
Vision Australia Foundation
Ph 613 9864 9222; Fax 613 9864 9210
Mobile 0438 755 565
http://www.visionaustralia.org.au/
Member, Education & Outreach Working Group,
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative
http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/
Judy Brewer
<jbrewer@w3.org> To: EOWG <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
Sent by: cc:
w3c-wai-eo-reque Subject: EOWG: Agenda, Friday July 12, 2002
st@w3.org
12-07-02 17:03
EOWG: Agenda, Friday July 12, 2002
Time: 8:30am - 10:30am US Eastern Daylight Time
Bridge:
"Zakim" +1 617 761 6200
Conference Code EOWG (3694) then press #
Agenda:
1. Outreach Updates
Briefly. Send to list in advance if possible.
2. Developing Organizational Policies on Web Accessibility
(Re-reviewed it to ensure tone & content consistent with rest of
suite)
Review clarification of reference to conformance evaluation
Proposed change to replace more of the "consider setting..."
phrases
http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/impl/pol.html
3. Evaluating Web Sites for Accessibility
Review remaining changes:
Addition of note about evolving versions, and product disclaimer,
at the front
Mention of intended copyedits
Check some dropped changes from previous version
Unaddressed: caution on false positives/false negatives with eval
tools
Proposed clean-up (see paragraph below) of page selection section,
for consistency
Latest document (but without copyedits) is now available at:
http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/impl/eval/Overview.html
3. Selecting and Using Software for Accessibility
Brief update from Wednesday's discussion
http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/impl/changelog.html#20020710
4. Re-check agenda planning for Toronto face-to-face:
(does not yet incorporate changes from Wednesday's meeting)
http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2002/07-agenda.html#agn
- Judy
Proposed substitute paragraph for section 1 of conformance evaluation:
1. Identify the scope of the Web site to be evaluated and the targeted
conformance level for the evaluation.
1. Identify the target conformance level of WCAG 1.0.
2. Identify a page selection, for manual and user testing, which
includes at least one of each different type of page on the site, and all
pages on which people are more likely to enter your site. Page selection
for dynamically generated Web content is addressed separately below.
3. Identify the entire Web site, including all pages at a base
URL, for automatic and semi-automatic evaluation. NOTE: If testing of the
entire site is not feasible (e.g. because of its unusually large size or
dynamic page generation) identify an expanded page selection, to be
disclosed publicly along with any public conformance claim. Suggested
inclusions in this expanded page selection: pages from different sections
of the Web site; pages representing a different "look & feel"; pages
representing different development tools and processes, including those
generated from databases; pages produced under different guidelines;
"contact" pages; pages critical to business operations; etc. If any area of
a Web site is excluded from evaluation, disclose this information along
with any conformance claim regarding the site.
--
Judy Brewer +1.617.258.9741 http://www.w3.org/WAI
Director, Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI), World Wide Web Consortium
(W3C)
MIT/LCS Room NE43-355, 200 Technology Square, Cambridge, MA, 02139, USA
Received on Friday, 12 July 2002 03:48:14 UTC