Re: Extension conflict/compatibility requirement

WCAG is testable a number of ways. One way is that most professionals
looking at a component could agree whether or not it fails. If we could not
be reasonably sure of that, we would not proceed with approving an SC.

Cheers,

David MacDonald



*Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*

Tel:  613.235.4902

LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>

www.Can-Adapt.com



*  Adapting the web to all users*
*            Including those with disabilities*

If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
<http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 1:03 PM, lisa.seeman <lisa.seeman@zoho.com> wrote:

> Hi Detlev
> Your point is very important we are trying to make the coga extension
> testable but  we can not be help to a higher standard then the original
> wcag 2.0. It does not seem we have a clear way of saying an SC is testable
> beyond having some testable sufficient techniques even though we agree that
> does not really make the SC testable.
>
>
> All the best
>
> Lisa Seeman
>
> Athena ICT Accessibility Projects <http://accessibility.athena-ict.com>
> LinkedIn <http://il.linkedin.com/in/lisaseeman/>, Twitter
> <https://twitter.com/SeemanLisa>
>
>
>
>
> ---- On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 18:15:37 +0200 *Detlev
> Fischer<detlev.fischer@testkreis.de <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>>* wrote
> ----
>
> Am 28.10.2015 um 16:17 schrieb Gregg Vanderheiden <
> gregg@raisingthefloor.org>:
>
> And having testable techniques does not make up for a non-testable SC.
> You need to be able to determine if the SC is met - not if a technique use
> for some content on the page passes.
>
>
> The thing is that there is no single test to determine if a SC is met, nor
> a finite set of tests (because techniques are not required, and new
> techniques to account for may emerge at any time - so in my view, this
> implies that conformance to a SC can never be established In a
> deterministic, fully replicable way (because this would require a fully
> operationalized, completely documented test procedure that can be exactly
> followed by anyone).
>
> I hope this does not come across as trolling. I think it is important to
> set realistic expectations regarding the outcome of a11y testing of complex
> content, and to realize that a conformance check is often not completely
> objective. It includes common sense judgments that take on board both
> quality (attributing "not ideal" content instances to either "pass" or
> "fail", and assessing the a11y impact of issues found) and quantity (number
> of issues on a particular page).
>
> Sent from phone
>
> And having testable techniques does not make up for a non-testable SC.
> You need to be able to determine if the SC is met - not if a technique use
> for some content on the page passes.
>
>
>
>