Re: Plea for help with testing

   1. CanAdapt has been evaluated... there were a few minor issues which
   were addressed and it's ready to go ... you can ask Detlev and Alastair for
   confirmation.
   2. Nomensa has been evaluated by myself and Laura, there are several
   outstanding issues (Google embedded map has some issues, and a button style
   has to be changed for contrast) There is also another issue around audio
   description that I think I'd like another opinion on. It's a promo video
   which is about a minute and 1/2 long, which has music in the background and
   text and pictures and video. Technically it's timed media because it has an
   audio track and the video track. There is a description below it with all
   of the text. Technically, it seems like it needs an audio description
   track, but practically speaking this would not add much to the experience
   for blind user. If anybody can justify passing it I'm all ears. It is here
   https://www.nomensa.com/ the heading that says great design starts
   here. If the Google Maps and video are removed temporarily and the button
   contrast is changed it will be ready to go. I'm also open to a wider
   discussion about the video in hopes of finding a rationale to pass it.


Cheers,
David MacDonald



*Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*

Tel:  613.235.4902

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

twitter.com/davidmacd

GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>

www.Can-Adapt.com <http://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, Apr 4, 2018 at 9:59 AM, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>
wrote:

> AGWG’ers,
>
>
>
> We are officially down to the wire, and we are in great shape for the
> implementations for individual success criteria, but not as great shape for
> the full site conformance.
>
>
>
> Here’s the scorecard: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG21/CR/scorecard
>
>
>
> We need two examples of pages that meet each success criteria, and we
> essentially have that. I’m not worried about this part.
>
>
>
> We also need 8 web sites that conform at the AA level and 2 web sites that
> conform at the AAA level (and two independent evaluations that confirm
> that).  Right now we have 1 site that meets AA and none that meet AAA.
>
>
>
> We do have one AAA in the works and interest by the owner to fix the
> issues that we identified, but need another person to evaluate that site.
>
>
>
> Here’s a run-down of what we need:
>
> AA
>
>    - 3-5 sites that meet at the AA level. A “site” needs to be 5 pages
>    minimum (and for testing purposes it is ideal to have it not be much
>    larger). These can be sites found in the wild or demonstration sites, but
>    they need a public URI and need to be available through June.
>    - Another evaluator for Knowbility
>    - Another evaluator for A11yrules
>
>
>
> AAA
>
>    - 1-2 sites that meet at the AAA level. A “site” needs to be 5 pages
>    minimum (and for testing purposes it is ideal to have it not be much
>    larger). These can be sites found in the wild or demonstration sites, but
>    they need a public URI and need to be available through June.
>    - Another 1-2 evaluators for lflegal.com
>
>
>
> Implementations link: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG21/CR/implementations
>
>
>
> Found a site that looks promising? Submit it here (
> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG21/CR/select_site) and start evaluating it!
>
>
>
> *We need to have 8 sites at AA and 2 at AAA, tested and confirmed to meet
> that conformance level by at least two people by Tuesday morning if we are
> to keep on schedule.*
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> AWK
>
>
>
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
>
> Group Product Manager, Accessibility
>
> Adobe
>
>
>
> akirkpat@adobe.com
>
> http://twitter.com/awkawk
>