- From: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
- Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 18:09:27 +1100
- To: Web Content Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
For each individual success criterion, consider the following: 1. Does it apply to all web content? In all circumstances? If not, appropriate limitations and qualifications should be included in the statement of the success criterion. If you are unable to specify these qualifications precisely, then perhaps it belongs in the "advisory" category rather than a success criterion that everyone implementing the checkpoint is required to meet. 2. Is it expressed clearly and concisely, in a style that is consistent with other parts of the guidelines document? 3. Does it introduce new technical terminology? If so, can this be avoided without making the success criterion vague, misleading or overly lengthy? If new terminology is being introduced, you should, if possible, provide a definition that can be included in the glossary. 4. Is it testable? In most cases, would informed observers be likely to agree on whether or not this success criterion has been implemented for different types of pages? Are there specific tests, either manual or automated, that could be used to determine whether the success criterion has been implemented? If the success criterion is not testable then it belongs in the "advisory" section of the success criteria for this checkpoint. Points to be considered in reviewing all of the success criteria proposed for a particular checkpoint: 1. Are these success criteria sufficient? If a content developer implemented all of these success criteria, (and nothing else) would the checkpoint always be met? If not, some amendment or addition to the success criteria is needed. 2. Regarding the testable success criteria: are all of these criteria necessary in order to satisfy the checkpoint? Specifically, is it necessary to implement all of these success criteria, taking into account any limitations or qualifications expressed therein, in order to meet the checkpoint? 3. Regarding the "advisory", non-testable, suggestions provided along with the success criteria: do these enhance accessibility? Can any of them be rewritten so as to be made precise and testable? If so, then they belong in the "testable success criteria" category.
Received on Saturday, 26 January 2002 02:09:35 UTC