See also: IRC log
EV: Welcome
<ericvelleman> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wcag-em-comments/>
<ericvelleman> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wcag-em-comments/
EV: valuable comments, 7 sofar
... We will start making a DoC this weekend
... some people used WCAG-EM and compared it with their own methods
VC: sent WCAG EM to a lot of people, very positive reviews
EV: we have to ask people to really try out WCAG-EM
EV: there are a number of websites available for
testing
... library page of large university
VC: they agree to being used as test case, one question: memorandum of understanding on the use of test-data
EV: Moe has another website we can use
MK: a subset of a very big corporate website
peter, would you mind taking over?
<Detlev> could yOu repeat. mOE
Plan is to test website via the methodology in stages (not a run of the entire methodology)
<Detlev> Moe, could you please repeat the URL?
EV: Idea is to do "unit testing" of methodology
at this stage
... Also a question from site candidate #1 about a MOU
Site #2 is a portion of IBM's website
Site #1 is a library website
Site #3 is a game website
<ericvelleman> Are you muted?
<ericvelleman> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/48225/testrun/results
<Detlev> sorry, my connection was lost...
EV: Thoughts on the questionaire? Using it to gather test results?
PK: Is survey certainly not visible to public?
<MartijnHoutepen> i get a login screen
PK: Believe you need to have a W3C login to reach this page
<MartijnHoutepen> tried it in a different browser
Liz: Confused by survey. What is being sought in it?
EV: We aren't really evaluating a website; we are evaluating EvalTF. Specifically Steps 1-3
Liz: Never done this before, so feels she will be a good candidate. And is a little confused.
PK: It would be helpful to start the questionnaire with an explanation. Also to add a question about HOW the representative sample was generated (since we don't give guidance on that topic)
<ericvelleman> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/48225/testrun/
DF: will changes made to the current questionnaire?
PK: Since survey requires password to view it, so suggests include URL to websites in it.
EV: Plans to do one survey for each site reviewed.
<Sarah_Swierenga> +1 on the three questionnaires, one for each site
DF: Would prefer to have this all in one survey
EV: Will think about options... But let us first
focus on the survey we have, which has info about game site
... Any other thoughts on the way we are doing this, the questions we have?
<Mike_Elledge> +1 for one questionnaire per survey
EV: In next week, will send out a reminder to the
group about the survey - ask everyone to fill this in (at least the
volunteers).
... Then discuss differences in WBS system (or mailing list without any URL
reference to the site)
<MartijnHoutepen> yes
ME: Which URLs will we be testing? Sent to list?
EV: No, will not go to list. Will be in WBS
questionnaires.
... Will work on an MOU for the other two websites, so we can work on those
too.