Accessibility Conformance Testing Teleconference

Updated req document

<Wilco> https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/blob/master/ACT-reqs.md

wilco: he has been working requirement doc

<Wilco> https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/pull/1

in regards to rdeltour's comment

rdeltour: the person who does not know previous discussion may not understand the context
... test should be part of rules?

wilco: test can be part of rules but it does not need to be in the rules doc.

<Wilco> Tests should be provided for ACT Rules, to allow implementors to validate their implementation.

wilco: tests such as html code snippet.

rdeltour: more exact meaning for "measurable" needed?

wilco: criteria/strict meaning may be able to be addressed in other doc, not framework doc.

shadi: is it about false positive or accuracy of test
... agree with jemma about taking care of this issue with criteria doc.

wilco: it is not unit test. it is more of how the test result are reliable

redeltour: two points, 1, it sounds difficult to measure this.
... 2. will the accuracy concept carry good presentation of all web page or just one part such as no alt for img?

<shadi> [[The Framework will provide criteria and benchmarking mechanism to validate and measure the accuracy of test rules.]]

<rdeltour> +1

shadi: we need to find out what benchmarking mechanism means and more.

<shadi> [[The Framework will provide criteria and benchmarking mechanism to validate and measure the accuracy of test rules. Note: Accuracy is deviation of actual test results from expected results.]]

jemma: what does " the accuracy of test rules" mean?

wilco: how often rule return invalid results such as false negative and false positive

shadi: it was defined as "Accuracy is deviation of actual test results from expected results"

rdeltour: +1

jemma: +1

rdeltour: comment on "Is it the Rec track requirement?"

shadi: let me wordsmithing here a bit.

<shadi> [[The Framework will provide support for different organizations and vendors to migrate their test rules into the required format. This may include mappings to other formats, and tolerance for different test rules structures and parameters where possible.]]

<shadi> [[The Framework will provide support for different organizations and vendors to migrate their test rules into the required format. This may include mappings to other formats, and tolerance to accommodate different test rule structures and parameters where possible.]]

<Wilco> [[The Framework will enable different organizations and vendors to migrate their test rules into the required format. This may include mappings to other formats, and tolerance to accommodate different test rule structures and parameters where possible.]]

wilco: may be we can use the word, "enabling" in terms of accommodating different test rules?

rdeltour: +1

<Wilco> The Framework will enable different organizations and vendors to migrate their test rules into the required format. This may include mappings to other formats, and tolerance to accommodate different test rule structures and parameters where possible.

rdeltour: my last comment for adding introduction to the doc?

shadi: it also could be scope requirement

<shadi> [[#1. scope of "testing mode": automatic, semi-, and manual. possibly with a note that phase 1 will focus on automated testing

<shadi> #2. scope of "web technologies": like HTML, CSS, JS, etc. possibly with a note that phase 1 will focus on HTML and CSS

wilco: I would like to get two consensus for this requirement doc. I would like to use next two meetings to wordsmith and revise the doc.

<shadi> #3. scope of "guidelines": will address WCAG 2.0 but also be open to future versions of WCAG and other guidelines where possible

<shadi> ]]

shadi: in introduction, we can also point out work statement.
... rather than duplicating the content in the framework doc.

Jemma: +1

wilco: is there anything we were missing from doc

redltour: it looks complete

rdeltour: question for digital publishing was about the scope and we addressed it here.

wilco: is there any wcag technique and document we need to look at?
... we are aiming for wcag rules

shadi: such as success and failure?

<shadi> [ACT rules will be mapped to Techniques and Failures where possible]]

shadi: we should also put somewhere that framework would not include ACT rules, rather to help develop the rules.

<shadi> +1 to not creating accessibility requirements!

shadi: we can also put the relationship with auto-wcag and add those to introduction.

wilco: we need to be explicit about the relationship act framework and act techniques

shadi: we can mention that we will use "existing work"
... "Existing work in this field should be the bases for the ACT Framework to ease the adoption." sounds good

wilco: I took notes from this meeting and will get some more from Mary and revise the doc.
... I will get it out before monday with update and need feedback by end of Tuesday.
... do you want to talk about meeting schedule?

shadi: let's work out meeting schedule offline since webex will end soon.