Re: automated wcag validation rules

Hi, 

After spending many years trying to develop an "expert system" based tool designed to assess the fully dynamic web content you get in the modern browser GUI, I came to the conclusion that once you step away from just assessing HTML5 the dynamic nature of how a web page is built in the DOM, with interaction of all additional technologies and user actions becomes impossibly complex - especially, when compounded by the variations in the way the DOM is constructed in different browsers on different devices.

So, instead I've been concentrating on the development of Evaluera Ltd's A-Tester tool which evaluates the pre-enhanced version of a live http(s) web page designed with progressive enhancement against Evaluera's "WCAG 2.0 Level-AA conformance statements for HTML5 foundation markup" (http://www.evaluera.co.uk/easycheck.html) and delivers a report that, in the absence of issues, can act as a very broad and easily confirmed WCAG 2.0 Level-AA claim.

This tool has a very tight focus and assesses only the HTML5 in a web page, in effect the basic DOM created only from the HTML5 mark-up in the source code (without enhancement by scripts,  CSS styles, third-party content, etc…).  Noting, this basic DOM is much more stable across accessing devices. 

In light of the complexities mentioned in the first paragraph, producing a standardized set of machine testable wcag2 conformance criteria that any tool claiming to be testing wcag conformance can be tested against may, in my opinion, be almost impossible if you require the tested web page to be accessed post-enhancement by all its technologies and possible user actions.  

However, if you are interested in ensuring that tools "at the very least" enable a person to test the "HTML5 foundation markup" (no scripts, no styles) as a basis for progressive enhancement then this work could be very achievable, and of great importance in the coming years (especially with up-and-coming European legislation).  

If you would require help with this later task, just let me know.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts / comments.

Very best regards

Alistair Garrison 

On 18 Mar 2015, at 12:25, Andrew Kirkpatrick wrote:

> Agreed.  I’m not too familiar with this CG, but since you asked about “any work/discussion” this seemed worth pointing out.  J                                                                                                                      
>  
> From: Steve Faulkner [mailto:faulkner.steve@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2015 8:20 AM
> To: Andrew Kirkpatrick
> Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org; Richard Schwerdtfeger
> Subject: Re: automated wcag validation rules
>  
> thanks Andrew, appears that they are not in business of producing spec though.
> 
> --
> 
> Regards
> 
> SteveF
> HTML 5.1
>  
> On 18 March 2015 at 12:12, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com> wrote:
> In terms of people looking into this there’s the Automated WCAG Monitoring Community Group:https://www.w3.org/community/auto-wcag/
>  
> From: Steve Faulkner [mailto:faulkner.steve@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2015 8:03 AM
> To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org; Richard Schwerdtfeger
> Subject: automated wcag validation rules
>  
> Hi all,
> 
> had a brief discussion with Rich s about a minumum set of automated conformance criteria
> 
> Problem: many automated tools claim to test wcag criteria, but there is no standardized set (to my knowledge) of conformance criteria rules that can be checked using automated software. This has lead to a range of tools claiming to test WCAG conformance when in fact some requirements are out of step/incorrect.
> 
> Has there been any work/discussion on producing a standardized set of machine testable wcag2 conformance criteria that any tool claiming to be testing wcag conformance can be tested against?
> --
> 
> Regards
> 
> SteveF
> HTML 5.1
>