w3c/wbs-design or
by mail to sysreq.
W3C
Site Navigation
Nearby
Results of Questionnaire ACT TF - Rule Update Review: HTML page has title
The results of this questionnaire are available to anybody. In addition, answers are sent to the following email addresses: team-wcag-act-surveys@w3.org,maryjom@us.ibm.com,wilco.fiers@deque.com
This questionnaire was open from 2020-04-14 to 2020-04-22.
5 answers have been received.
Jump to results for question:
1. Instructions
Review the updated rule rule HTML page has title and answer the questions in this survey. We had previously published this rule, but there were some remaining comments from the AG WG to clean up which have been addressed in this update. See survey results from the AG WG review.
Changes include:
- Added G88 and H25 to the mapping
- Editorial changes to applicability and expectations
- Added a link to HTML 5 in the background
- Updated example descriptions
- Removed passed example 6
If there are issues with the rule, you may either open an issue in GitHub or provide details in the entry fields for the applicable question.
Summary
| Choice | All responders |
|---|---|
| Results |
Details
| Responder | Instructions |
|---|---|
| Wilco Fiers | |
| Charles Adams | |
| Detlev Fischer | |
| Kathy Eng | |
| Mary Jo Mueller |
2. Remaining open issues
Are there any remaining open issues for this rule that were opened prior to this review?
Summary
| Choice | All responders |
|---|---|
| Results | |
| Yes there are open issues that need to be resolved. I have listed them below. | |
| Yes, there are open issues but they don't need to be resolved for the rule to be published. | 4 |
| No, there are no open issues. | 1 |
Details
| Responder | Remaining open issues | Comments |
|---|---|---|
| Wilco Fiers | Yes, there are open issues but they don't need to be resolved for the rule to be published. | https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1091 I think this needs to be clarified in the understanding docs of 4.1.1, not in this rule. |
| Charles Adams | No, there are no open issues. | |
| Detlev Fischer | Yes, there are open issues but they don't need to be resolved for the rule to be published. | |
| Kathy Eng | Yes, there are open issues but they don't need to be resolved for the rule to be published. | https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1091 Also, should we update this rule to address https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/issues/449? - Add Note: Testing that the page title describes the purpose of the page content is not part of this rule and must be tested separately. |
| Mary Jo Mueller | Yes, there are open issues but they don't need to be resolved for the rule to be published. |
3. Other questions or concerns
Do you have any questions or concerns about the updates to this rule?
Summary
| Choice | All responders |
|---|---|
| Results | |
| Yes, I have questions or concerns, described below. | 2 |
| No, I have no further questions or concerns. | 3 |
Details
| Responder | Other questions or concerns | Comments |
|---|---|---|
| Wilco Fiers | No, I have no further questions or concerns. | |
| Charles Adams | No, I have no further questions or concerns. | |
| Detlev Fischer | Yes, I have questions or concerns, described below. | I think it would be useful for readers of this rule to be aware that 2.4.2 will need an additional check for the value of title ("...that describe topic or purpose") to avoid the impression that this rule alone can be sufficient to PASS 2.4.2. We know that, but do others? I think it increases the value if a rule conveys such dependencies to less informed readers. Possibly the place for that may be section "Assumptions". |
| Kathy Eng | Yes, I have questions or concerns, described below. | Passed Example 2: This page has a title element that is for the entire page, including content in the iframe without its own title. - This test does not check for a title that describes content purpose, so including "content in the iframe" would not be entirely correct. - Suggest a wording change: The title element provided serves as the title for the page and the iframe since it does not have its own. |
| Mary Jo Mueller | No, I have no further questions or concerns. |
4. Readiness for publishing
Do you think the updates to this rule are ready to be published?
Summary
| Choice | All responders |
|---|---|
| Results | |
| Yes, it is ready to publish as-is. | 3 |
| Yes, it is ready to publish with the following changes. | 2 |
| No, it is not ready to publish and the reason is documented below. |
Details
| Responder | Readiness for publishing | Comments |
|---|---|---|
| Wilco Fiers | Yes, it is ready to publish as-is. | |
| Charles Adams | Yes, it is ready to publish as-is. | |
| Detlev Fischer | Yes, it is ready to publish with the following changes. | AS described above under 3. Other questions or concerns. |
| Kathy Eng | Yes, it is ready to publish with the following changes. | adjust wording of pass example 2 |
| Mary Jo Mueller | Yes, it is ready to publish as-is. |
More details on responses
Non-responders
The following persons have not answered the questionnaire:
- Katie Haritos-Shea
- David MacDonald
- Romain Deltour
- Alastair Campbell
- Chris Loiselle
- Jonathan Avila
- Rachael Bradley Montgomery
- Daniel Montalvo
- Helen Burge
- Todd Libby
- Thomas Brunet
- Catherine Droege
- Suji Sreerama
- Shane Dittmar
- Nayan Padrai
- Sage Keriazes
Send an email to all the non-responders.
Compact view of the results / list of email addresses of the responders
WBS home / Questionnaires / WG questionnaires / Answer this questionnaire
Report issues
on GitHub project