Re: [techs] Summary of Techniques teleconference 01 October 2003

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, Michael Cooper wrote:

>Implementation testing - there are two types of testing, testing the
>specification (the guidelines) and testing content. Focusing mainly on
>specification testing, we considered what needs to be done and how to do it.
>The implementation testing framework draft [1] is a starting point but needs
>to be expanded. Considering the issue that we need to verify that the
>guidelines and techniques lead to true benefits to people with disabilities,
>we looked at the How People with Disabilities Use the Web document [2] and
>decided to formalize the personae and use cases found there.

Why is it us that needs to test this and not the main group? We also need to
be aware that there are pretty serious traps waiting if you use hypothetical
people you created to test your hypothetical solutions to their hypothetical
problems. Not that it isn't a useful techniqe for desk checking, just that
the results aren't that strongly guaranteed.

>We also need to support Evaluation and Repair Tools guidance, not to
>validate tools but as a way of testing the advice within the techniques.
>We're unsure where this lands but considered the possibility of creating
>another Task Force within the WCAG group.

Is the Evaluation and Repair Tools group not going to be rechartered? They
would seem like the obvious place to do this work, rather than a task force
in this group.

>* Tom: Write proposal of how a test suite might look based on his work

You might want to look at the first draft of the testing method proposed by
EuroAccessibility as an example...
http://www.euroaccessibility.org/EACEvaluationChecklist0a1.html

cheers

Chaals

Received on Saturday, 11 October 2003 13:52:44 UTC