Evaluation and Repair Tools Working Group Teleconference

17 Jul 2013

See also: IRC log


Shadi, Philip, Emanuelle, Carlos, Samuel
Christoph, Samuel


Updated AERT



CV: did updates according to previous discussion
... updated references
... added two new sections, 2.3 and 2.4
... would like feedback on 1.3, then section 2

SAZ: is 1.3 "complementary resources" or rather "background reading"?
... also not sure if 1.2 is needed

CV: can remove it

SAZ: important to set the tone and frame the document in the abstract and introduction
... but the subsections of the introduction can be done later
... wondering if it is too verbose?
... maybe start with adding all the features with a sentence each, then come back to expand the sections?

<Sinarmaya_> I have a comment about the 2.2, I think that the typical difference is betwen "propietary" and open source, not about commercial and open source.

SAZ: think the correct term "proprietary" rather than "commercial" (vs "open source")


<Sinarmaya_> An example can be the TAW 1.0 that have had a crawler, but was not commercial.


ability to crawl big web sites or portals

types of web technologies handled by the tool, for instance HTML markup, stylesheets, PDF documents, Flash applications, multimedia, etc.

ability to integrate dynamic content generated via scripting (dynamic modification of the Document Object Model according to the user interaction with the application, etc.)

support for testing APIs like the WebDriver API, for instance

support for standard reporting languages like EARL

support for different accessibility compliance environments in different countries

integration in the web development workflow as a plug-in add-on in different Integrated Development Environments (open source or commercial)

multilinguality and internationalization



<Sinarmaya_> support for manual review and report generation

SAZ: think start by listing them, then about how to organize them

CV: yes, clusters will emerge

<samuelm> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2013Feb/0011.html


<samuelm> (there was also a followup discussion in the thread I just linked)

<Sinarmaya_> agree

<Sinarmaya_> Maybe this reference have sense: http://www.w3.org/WAI/Policy/harmon.html

<Sinarmaya_> and this one: http://www.w3.org/WAI/impl/pol.html

SAZ: think "compliance environments" (aka "configurability of checks") is separate from "localization / internationalization"

SM: should not confuse users by saying that policies can be different
... but rather that checks can be configured flexibly

<Sinarmaya_> +1 for requirements ;-)

SM: classify features according to
... 1. what is evaluated
... 2. what can be configured
... 3. how is it presented
... might be good to think along the lines of these dimensions
... there may be other dimensions too

<samuelm> sections 2.1, 2.2 and 2.4 fall into the group of what is evaluated

Next Meeting

next meeting: 24 July 2013

<samuelm> http://dsai2013.utad.pt/

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.138 (CVS log)
$Date: 2013-07-18 07:48:01 $