- From: <maurizio@usabile.it>
- Date: Sun Jul 13 10:06:07 2003
- To: Giorgio Brajnik <giorgio@dimi.uniud.it>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Giorgio Brajnik: > In my opinion it is easy to determine if the textual alternative is > equivalent: run a number of user tests, measure time to completion > and/or number of errors and then compare these results with results > obtained from a control group. (It's not a quick process, > but it is doable and if done properly it leads to repeatable results, > i.e. it is standard enough). I strongly agree. Should this mean that we have to include some kind of user testing or inter-subjcective judgements in accessibility evaluation? This problem involve any semantic issue in accessibility (also navigation, content comprehension, etc.). What does the Wcag-wg think about all non-machine testable evaluations of accessibility? There is an official position? Thank you Maurizio Boscarol http://www.usabile.it
Received on Sunday, 13 July 2003 10:06:07 UTC