See also: IRC log
CS: Drew sent comments on the mapping, doesn't have CVS yet
SAZ: working on CVS account for Drew, will send directions to generate SSH key
AJL: do all the tests map to the same techniques?
CS: we don't map to the technique, if the test is an incorrect implementation of the technique
AJL: so only the last one passes because its a
pass
... the other two are failures because the text or audio is not right
SAZ: it is an interesting design concept that "failed tests" do not map to techniques, would like michaels input on it
CS: we can map to common failures, but not all failures are common failure
AJL: would be a value-add to be able to say that this failure maps to this success criteria
CS: there is a way to do this
SAZ: need to balance what a tools developer may
want to see (all tests) and what a web developer may want to see
... failures will quickly fill the space, for example in the quick
reference
<scribe> ACTION: AJL finalize the technique/failure mapping [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/30-tsdtf-minutes.html#action01]
<Christophe> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2007AprJun/0043.html
<scribe> ACTION: CS send e-mail to MC and cc TF on mapping failures to SCs, and potential impact on the quick reference [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/30-tsdtf-minutes.html#action02]
CS: we have action items on reviewing test samples
<Christophe> http://www.w3.org/2006/tsdtf/TestSampleStatusList
<scribe> ACTION: SAZ review test samples marked "reviewer 03" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/30-tsdtf-minutes.html#action03]
<scribe> ACTION: TB review test samples marked "reviewer 01" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/30-tsdtf-minutes.html#action04]
<scribe> ACTION: CI review test samples marked "reviewer 02" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/30-tsdtf-minutes.html#action05]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert-tsdtf/2007Sep/0006.html
http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/tests/process
<scribe> ACTION: CV look into test samples that RR could do [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/30-tsdtf-minutes.html#action06]
<scribe> ACTION: AJL review test samples marked "reviewer 04" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/30-tsdtf-minutes.html#action07]
<Christophe> How to use Schematron to check test samples: http://bentoweb.org/refs/TCDL2.0/tsdtf_schematron.html
CS: defer this to next week when MC is on the call too
SAZ: my only concern is amout of work vs added
value, but think if needed than better now than later
... i'm happy with the group decision
... whatever is decided (i will not be here for the next call)
<scribe> ACTION: CS to provide an estimate on the amount of work required [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/30-tsdtf-minutes.html#action08]
<Christophe> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert-tsdtf/2007Oct/0002.html
<Christophe> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert-tsdtf/2007Oct/0005.html
http://canada.esat.kuleuven.be/bentoweb/misc/tsdtf/tcdlhtmlexamples/sc1.2.5_l3_001.20071016.html
CI: at first glance it is an improvement, don't have many more comments right now
SAZ: what does "test case needs review" mean?
CS: the expected result is "can not tell"
SAZ: we decided to fix this, right?
CS: this one isn't yet fixed
SAZ: maybe also a list for Technologies & Features?
CS: probably nested lists if there are features too
next meeting in two weeks