W3C

ERT WG

22 Feb 2005

Attendees

Present
Johannes, Shadi, CarlosI, Karl, Chris, Myriam, Gabrielle, Sailesh, Wendy, Chrisoula
Regrets
Charles, Steve
Chair
Shadi
Scribe
Chris

Contents


 

 

<shadi> Scribe: Andrew K.

<karl> scrunch scrunch lunch

sa: test suites - who has seen it?

test suite status http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/checkstatus.html

sa: helpful for eval tools?

<chrisoula> hello IPcaller should probably be me, but I cannot connect through the phone

<Zakim> karl, you wanted to ask about tests, test suite and test assertions

kd: must be in EARL
... distintion between assertions and test cases
... useful to see work flow that can be used
... more than test cases needed
... EARL should be independant of test cases

sa: yes EARL should be seperate from test cases
... 3 layers of WCAG
... OWL or RDF might also be used to define relationships
... EARL is other component
... should look at test case description language TCDL too

wc: working group work focus on WCAG clear enough to get to rec status
... need to get through process to rec status
... still trying to figure out some details, looking for help from ER

gb: EARL too general, not specific or complete
... likes checks, uses in ht/checks

sa: is EARL too general? What is missing?

gb: finds that EARL is not very usable - start with concrete case

sa: EARL needs more concrete examples

sa: make sure that test suites are what we need to produce good evaluations
... what do test cases lack?
... example, measure for completeness
... should be helping tool developers
... keep eye on test suite to see how we can support it.

<shadi> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2005Feb/0015.html

Use Cases for EARL

sa: complete?

ma: complete

gb: seems OK for me
... how to make assertion in Italian?

sa: internationalization is important
... use name attributes, multiple messages in EARL
... if description from test case, that can be used, no need to generate your own
... somewhere translation must exist
... multilingual issue raised elsewhere, important

ga: have translated some, can provide

sa: need to look at structure of test case within WCAG, use TCDL?
... we need spec

sp: can we specify what EARL does?

<karl> http://esw.w3.org/topic/TestCaseMetadata

<karl> http://esw.w3.org/topic/TestSuiteArchitecture

sp: how to define need for EARL?

<karl> RDF Test Case Schema http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/testSchema.n3

sa: need to say what EARL can't do

<karl> http://esw.w3.org/topic/TestDevelopmentMethodologies

sa: would like to produce some sort of requirements this quarter
... asks SP if he could write up his ideas

sp: trying to figure out what EARL's really gonna do
... what can't we do that EARL will do?

sa: use cases on list demo what EARL does
... uniform way of describing test results - will discuss with SP off line

EARL Scenarios

ma: senarios are OK but don't cover everything so more senarions needed

gb: useful to define requirement documents

<karl> chrisR this time it's Karl ;)

wc: do senarions first will clarify requirements

sp: ack

sa: generate requirements first or use cases first?

kd: if cycle is short enough then can do both
... after creating user senario then draw out requirements

sp: both are related - without user needs can be no requirements

sa: ack
... ask for discussion on list - use cases seem to be complete now so on to senarios and requirements

Brainstorm of EARL Requirements

F2F at the W3C Technical Plenary

ma: at FTF to take ideas from list and discuss

sa: will have draft doc that can go back to group
... other topics?

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/eval/

sa: will have joing meeting with EO where we can discuss
... where does EARL fit into this process, tools too
... another topic is test suites, Friday meeting will have observers from Techs Task group

<scribe> ACTION: everyone will review user senarios and identify any gaps [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-er-minutes#action01]

<scribe> ACTION: brainstorm and produce requirements to list for all [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-er-minutes#action02]

sa: next meeting Mar. 8 (no meeting next week)

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: brainstorm and produce requirements to list for all [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-er-minutes#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: everyone will review user senarios and identify any gaps [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-er-minutes#action01]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.111 (CVS log)
$Date: 2005/02/22 18:19:42 $