Re: [techs] test case review assignments

Ben, thanks for the thoughtful review!

(In the future could you include the test number(s) in the subject line?)

> ...suggest replacing "content" with "delivery unit"
> throughout -- applies to technique 1.2 as well
I'd like to keep the test suite language in the vernacular as much as 
possible to make it usable by a wider audience. I'd like to change "content" 
back to "document" too. Hmmm, I'm wondering if maybe we need the official 
precise language as you've suggested and then a translation into "plain 
language" too.

> The related SC reference needs numbering fix (was SC4 is SC3 in
> latest draft)
Yes, I'll have to go through he whole bunch of tests and fix them all.

> the example in test file 50-2 has a somewhat cryptic title...
This likely applies to all the titles. I'd like to review them but postpone 
until a bit later.

> we may want to consider associating this test...
> a higher level. (current mapping is to a  level 3 criterion)
Yes. I agree that having a valid title should be level 1 or 2.

>> * TITLE must contain at least 1 character.
> I propose removing this note and replacing it with something like, 
> "the title element contains at least one printable character."
Sounds fine to me.

> 2.) Expected results includes the phrase,  "title contains text." Propose 
> that we revise it to read, "The title element contains text." in order to 
> avoid confusion with the title attribute (note: this editorial suggestion 
> applies to multiple tests in the current test suite)

> 3.) With the exception of test 50 (content contains a title element), each 
> of these tests should be moved to general techniques since the concept of 
> title is not unique to HTML.
I don't think so. The test is specific to (X)HTML because it talks about 
things like elements and attributes. Things will be different in other 

>> * TITLE should be less than 150 characters. 
>> <>
> Propose that we delete this test since it seems to fall more on the side 
> of usability than accessibility. If we were to keep it, we'd need a way to 
> identify it as good advice or optional in some way.
I propose we keep it and add the text "or user has confirmed that the title 
length is appropriate".

These sort of tests are very useful because they can be done by machines and 
are likely to be performed. Some documents have valid long titles 
(scientific or artistic papers). But very long title are likely the result 
of a machine stuffing the wrong text or a novice author that doesn't 
appreciate brevity in the title.

> 1.) test 51 seems to be a prerequisite test for this.

>> * TITLE should not contain placeholder text.
> 1.) Suggest adding additional language specific values and test files for 
> "Enter the title of your HTML document here," (XMLSpy default) "Untitled 
> Document," (DreamWeaver Default) and, "No Title" (Amaya default), and 
> "Untitled Page" (GoLive default). I'm sure there are others...
I agree. Other suggestions for placeholder title text?

>> * TITLE must describe the document.
> This test is very similar to the SC itself. Do we want to include tests 
> like this or could this information be covered by the SC and supporting 
> materials in the guide doc?
We need the test even if it is exactly the same as the SC. The test suite 
should stand on its own and not require the user to perform outside steps.

> Items that relate to the entire test suite:
I'd like to reply to these comments in a following message.


Received on Wednesday, 27 July 2005 20:57:10 UTC