- From: <Kurt_Mattes@bankone.com>
- Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 14:49:12 -0500
- To: <tina@greytower.net>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
> Why is that? Odd as it may seem, as much as some care about the Internet being accessible, most care more about their financial information being correct at their financial institution. > Are you honestly suggesting that a test need to include every single > combination of dynamic data and template, for every document, ... No - I did not suggest this, I stated it as a matter of fact. One template can be populated by a wide variety of data, depending on customer type [e.g. consumer versus small business]. Both smaller/shorter and larger/longer values need to be tested. Further, the possible output rendered by one template can vary dramatically - each variation must be tested. Point somehow was lost here - there are thousands of hours of testing involved when launching a new online banking site. I never said all of these were for accessibility testing. Given the large number of hours required to assure all users financial information is presented correctly, management is reluctant to add more testing hours to support additional browsers/platforms. > Testing each use-case against the basic system is *most certainly* not > something which requires "thousands of QA hours", You make this statement based on? I suppose you are comfortable with the banks records of your financial information being *basically* correct. For most visitors assuring that only "...the basic system..." is accurate is simply not good enough. Then there is the matter of what happens when exceptions occur - what does the system do? What information is provided to the user? Any one use-case can have multiple exception causes, each of these needs to be tested. As for the bit that was totally misunderstood... A) I did a terrible job of making a simple point B) simple point is, templates do nothing to reduce testing for accessibility when there are content related guidelines that require testing all the content of every page for accessibility. For example - it is a violation of the guidelines to have a language change occur without properly tagging it. Perhaps there is a lack of large site experience on this list. Misstating the cost involved in testing for accessibility does little to promote the cause. It is a real cost, a significant cost, a cost I have found tends to stop many before they even begin to attempt making their site accessible. Leading readers of this list to believe otherwise undermines credibility. [bottom-up quoting snipped] Kurt Mattes ********************************************************************** This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including any reliance thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this transmission in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you **********************************************************************
Received on Monday, 7 February 2005 19:49:47 UTC