Re: Automated and manual testing process

+1 
gregg


Gregg C Vanderheiden
greggvan@umd.edu



> On Jan 28, 2017, at 6:53 PM, Sailesh Panchang <spanchang02@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> Andrew,
> Here is my take:
> 
> Automated testing involves  the use of a tool that  is able to review a complete page or a portion thereof and list specific failures against WCAG SCs.
> Manual testing: involves  human testers identifying WCAG failures without relying on an automated tool.
> Manual testing may involve testing with assistive technologies as well as use of other software tools that measure contrast or flickering rate or changing the browser or OS settings or doing code reviews. The human tester uses the results of such tests to determine specific instances of failures.
> Human testers may rely on automated testing tools to identify certain failures efficiently and exhaustively based on ones experience of a tool. 
> Automated tools may need to be tweaked by knowledgeable  human testers for specific (or types of) content to minimize reporting of false-positives.
> I have always believed that it is a team process. It is difficult for one person to  identify all violations even when an automated tool is relied upon. In the field of usability too there is an article from 2000 (which I had referenced in my MS thesis)  that says that testing with five users uncovers most  issues.
> https://www.nngroup.com/articles/why-you-only-need-to-test-with-5-users/ 
> 
> Thanks,
> Sailesh Panchang
> 
> --------------------------------------------
> On Sat, 1/28/17, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com> wrote:
> 
> Subject: Automated and manual testing process
> To: "WCAG" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> Date: Saturday, January 28, 2017, 5:36 PM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AGWGer’s,
> I’d like to get the thoughts from the group on what
> constitutes “manual testing” (I’m more comfortable
> with what counts as automated testing).
> 
> 
> 
> Testing the presence of alternative text on an image in
> HTML or other formats can be done with automated testing,
> but testing for the presence of
> good alternative text
> requires (at least for now) human involvement in the test
> process (manual testing).
> 
> 
> 
> What if testing cannot be done by a single person and
> requires user testing – does that count as manual testing,
> or is that something different?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> AWK
> 
> 
> 
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
> Group Product Manager, Standards and
> Accessibility
> Adobe 
> 
> 
> 
> akirkpat@adobe.com
> http://twitter.com/awkawk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Sunday, 29 January 2017 04:35:00 UTC