- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 18:23:45 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- cc: w3c-wai-er-ig <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>
Hmm. This was similar to somethingthe UAAG group wanted. I would propose that we have qualitative rather than quantitative ratings. For some use cases you Yb - pass with unrelated errors would count as a pass, and for some cases it would score as a fail. So we would need to know what they are. The question also arises as to how many kinds of result we should include in earl and at what point we should leave people to subclass them for their own more detailed uses. Cheers Chaals On Tue, 25 Jun 2002, Ian Hickson wrote: Test results currently have a type (pass, fail, not applicable, etc) and a confidence (high, medium, low). I propose you add a third property: severity. This would be a record of how well or badly the test passed or failed. For example, a layout test could: pass completely pass, severity 100% Y pass with unrelated errors pass, severity 90% Yb pass partially pass, severity 50% P not be implemented at all fail, severity 0% N fail fail, severity 50% B fail so badly the feature is unusable fail, severity 90% D crash fail, severity 100% C This is very important for tests of features that can be implemented to different degrees. For example, CSS tests need this kind of report. You can see in the following test results page how this is used (except instead of severity, I used the codes on the right hand side of the column): http://www.hixie.ch/tests/tesremas/listresults.pl?ID=ETS&mainSortH=Tests&mainSortV=Score&mainMinTests=20&mainTrimmed=on This is separate from "importance", which is a property of the test itself. Cheers, -- Charles McCathieNevile http://www.w3.org/People/Charles phone: +61 409 134 136 W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI fax: +33 4 92 38 78 22 Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia (or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France)
Received on Sunday, 30 June 2002 18:23:46 UTC