- From: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 11:14:04 -0400
- To: "Chris Ridpath" <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>, "WAI ER IG List" <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>, josh@zafu.com
Chris and Josh, This is great! I've begun a preliminary review of SSB Technologies InSight (version 2.4 - couldn't download the latest - I'll have to talk with Tim again). The results that I have so far are at: http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/2001/07/insight.rdf In the quick 10 tests that I did, I found some interesting errors in InSight. I have a few questions/suggestions about the ATR tool and test files. 1. If the tool being evaluated identifies the problem, but doesn't offer the suggestion, does it pass? For example, test file 1-1-1-f12 is a horizontal rule image without alt-text. InSight correctly identifies that it is missing alt-text but doesn't suggest "horizontal rule." The ATR tool says, "Should trigger: Image missing ALT text (suggest "horizontal rule"). I said that it passed it, since it did trigger. Perhaps these ought to be separate - the suggestion from the error detection. I think it would be good to know if the correct suggestion was made or if any suggestion was made. 2. Several of the test files do not say what should trigger. e.g., 1-1-10-f1, 1-1-12-f1, 1-1-14-f1, 1-1-14-f2, 1-1-14-f3, 1-1-14-f4 1-1-10-f1.xml has a comment element while 1-1-1-f1.xml has a suggested_message and an empty comment element. 3. During my review I made comments about additional messages that InSight was generating as I went along. Those comments are not recorded in the results. Also, the comment field did not clear when I selected a new test file (as I had expected it to do). To write something new I had to delete the text then write. BUT none of that was captured. Thanks for your work Chris and Josh! --wendy -- wendy a chisholm world wide web consortium web accessibility initiative seattle, wa usa /--
Received on Thursday, 2 August 2001 11:02:43 UTC